Deutz (KHD) D 7506 or OLIVER 1465?

Which should you choose?

On performance, no comparable figure differs by more than its threshold: on this data the machines are level. On features, the Deutz D 7506 is ahead on top speed and PTO speeds.

  • The Deutz D 7506 suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 1000 rpm.
  • The Deutz D 7506 suits road haulage better on this data: 20% (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) more top speed.

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 Deutz (KHD) D 7506 and OLIVER 1465, with the call on each
QuestionD 75061465Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?52.5 kW (70.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”51.5 kW (69.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1465”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 D 7506 and the 1465.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the D 7506 and the 1465.
Which pumps more oil for implements?22.8 L/min (6.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”23.5 L/min (6.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1465”EvenEven on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?2,100 kg (4,630 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”2,100 kg (4,630 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1465”EvenEven on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which is heavier, for traction?3,155 kg (6,956 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”2,948 kg (6,499 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1465”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?5,800 kg (12,787 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”—No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 1465.
Which has the wider choice of gears?8 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”7Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1465”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 D 7506 and the 1465.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1465”AheadThe Deutz D 7506 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the OLIVER 1465 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
Which offers more PTO speeds?540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1465”AheadThe Deutz D 7506 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the OLIVER 1465 does not (as stated by the sources).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”—No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 1465.
Which drives on both axles?Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Deutz D 7506”Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1465”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1968–19701973–1975Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The OLIVER 1465 is newer: production began 5 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Deutz D 7506 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the OLIVER 1465 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • The Deutz D 7506 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the OLIVER 1465 does not (as stated by the sources).
  • The OLIVER 1465 is newer: production began 5 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • 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 hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, 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 drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
  • 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