Ford 5610 or VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 605?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 5610 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Volvo 605 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

  • The VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 605 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 45% (16.3 L/min / 4.3 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 Ford 5610 and VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 605, with the call on each
Question5610Volvo 605Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?53 kW (71 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5610”53.0 kW (71.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 605”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 5610 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Volvo 605 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 5610 and the Volvo 605.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 5610 and the Volvo 605.
Which pumps more oil for implements?36.4 L/min (9.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5610”52.7 L/min (13.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 605”AheadThe VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 605 has 45% more hydraulic flow (16.3 L/min / 4.3 gpm) than the Ford 5610 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?——No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 5610 and the Volvo 605.
Which is heavier, for traction?2,743 kg (6,047 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5610”3,440 kg (7,584 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 605”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 605 is 25% heavier (697 kg / 1,537 lb) than the Ford 5610 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
Which may carry more ballast and load?——No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 5610 and the Volvo 605.
Which has the wider choice of gears?8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5610”8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 605”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 5610 and the Volvo 605.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 5610”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 605”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 5610”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo 605”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 5610”independentTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo 605”EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
Which drives on both axles?Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 5610”Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo 605”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1981–19911983–1985EvenSame 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-VALMET Volvo 605 has 45% more hydraulic flow (16.3 L/min / 4.3 gpm) than the Ford 5610 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 605 is 25% heavier (697 kg / 1,537 lb) than the Ford 5610 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • 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.
  • Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
  • Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
  • Even on drive: every machine is available with four-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 power at the PTO shaft: the 5610 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Volvo 605 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, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.

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