David Brown 1194 or IMT 549 (DV-E)?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the David Brown 1194: hydraulic flow.

  • The David Brown 1194 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 70% (10.9 L/min / 2.9 gpm) more hydraulic flow.

Generated by rule set compare@4 from the figures on the side-by-side table, allowed by route “the same stated configuration”. Measured figures are compared only with measured, claimed only with claimed, at the same test condition; differences within each figure’s tolerance are not called.

What decides it, question by question?

Buyer questions for David Brown 1194 and IMT 549 (DV-E), with the call on each
Question1194549 (DV-E)Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?28.8 kW (38.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”28.8 kW (38.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”EvenEven on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call.
Which turns a litre of fuel into more work at the shaft?No figureNo call on fuel efficiency at the shaft: no figure on record for the 1194 and the 549 (DV-E).
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1194 and the 549 (DV-E).
Which pumps more oil for implements?26.5 L/min (7.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”15.6 L/min (4.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”AheadThe David Brown 1194 has 70% more hydraulic flow (10.9 L/min / 2.9 gpm) than the IMT 549 (DV-E) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?990 kg (2,183 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”1,417 kg (3,124 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the 1194: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”); the 549 (DV-E): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
Which is heavier, for traction?2,110 kg (4,652 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”2,090 kg (4,608 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”EvenEven on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which may carry more ballast and load?No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 1194 and the 549 (DV-E).
Which has the wider choice of gears?12Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”10Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
Which offers a creeper range?No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 1194 and the 549 (DV-E).
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which offers more PTO speeds?540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 1194 and the 549 (DV-E).
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1984–19851986–1996EvenSame era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The David Brown 1194 has 70% more hydraulic flow (10.9 L/min / 2.9 gpm) than the IMT 549 (DV-E) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • Even on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call.
  • Even on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
  • Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
  • Same era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • Not comparable on three-point lift: the 1194: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”); the 549 (DV-E): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
  • No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.

← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources