Güldner G 40 (S) or Güldner G 40 W?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the G 40 (S) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the G 40 W has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
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 | G 40 (S) | G 40 W | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 27.8 kW (37.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40” | 27.8 kW (37.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40W” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the G 40 (S) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the G 40 W 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 G 40 (S) and the G 40 W. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the G 40 (S) and the G 40 W. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the G 40 (S) and the G 40 W. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,490 kg (3,285 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40” | 1,490.000 kg (3,285 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40W” | 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? | 2,345 kg (5,170 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40” | 1,675 kg (3,693 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40W” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Güldner G 40 (S) is 40% heavier (670 kg / 1,477 lb) than the Güldner G 40W (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 G 40 (S) and the G 40 W. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40” | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40W” | 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? | YesTraktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40” | YesTraktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40W” | EvenEven on a creeper range: every machine offers one. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 20 km/h (12.4 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40” | 19.4 km/h (12.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40W” | 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? | 540/1150 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40” | 540/1150 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40W” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40W” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the G 40 (S). |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40W” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1963–1969 | 1965–1969 | 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 Güldner G 40 (S) is 40% heavier (670 kg / 1,477 lb) than the Güldner G 40W (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- 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 forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on a creeper range: every machine offers one.
- 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 power at the PTO shaft: the G 40 (S) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the G 40 W 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, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources