Ford 5600 (A) or VOLVO-BM 2250 (Bolinder-Munktell T 2250)?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 5600 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2250 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The VOLVO-BM 2250 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 23% (8.4 L/min / 2.2 gpm) more hydraulic flow and 18% (344 kg / 758 lb) more three-point lift.
- The Ford 5600 (A) suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: four-wheel drive.
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?
| Question | 5600 (A) | 2250 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 50.0 kW (67.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5600” | 50 kW (67 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Bolinder-Munktell T 2250” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 5600 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2250 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft. |
| 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 5600 (A) and the 2250. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 5600 (A) and the 2250. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 36.6 L/min (9.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5600” | 45.0 L/min (11.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Bolinder-Munktell T 2250” | AheadThe VOLVO-BM 2250 has 23% more hydraulic flow (8.4 L/min / 2.2 gpm) than the Ford 5600 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,876 kg (4,136 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5600” | 2,220 kg (4,894 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Bolinder-Munktell T 2250” | AheadThe VOLVO-BM 2250 has 18% more lift (344 kg / 758 lb) than the Ford 5600 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,250 kg (7,165 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5600” | 3,130 kg (6,900 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Bolinder-Munktell T 2250” | 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 5600 (A) and the 2250. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5600” | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Bolinder-Munktell T 2250” | EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 5600 (A) and the 2250. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5600” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Bolinder-Munktell T 2250” | 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? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 5600” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Bolinder-Munktell T 2250” | AheadThe Ford 5600 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the VOLVO-BM 2250 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 5600” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 2250. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 5600” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Bolinder-Munktell T 2250” | AheadThe Ford 5600 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the VOLVO-BM 2250 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1975–1981 | 1978–1983 | EvenSame 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 VOLVO-BM 2250 has 23% more hydraulic flow (8.4 L/min / 2.2 gpm) than the Ford 5600 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The VOLVO-BM 2250 has 18% more lift (344 kg / 758 lb) than the Ford 5600 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 5600 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the VOLVO-BM 2250 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Ford 5600 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the VOLVO-BM 2250 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- 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 power at the PTO shaft: the 5600 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2250 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- 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