Güldner G 40 (S) or Kramer KL 400?

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 KL 400 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?

Buyer questions for Güldner G 40 (S) and Kramer KL 400, with the call on each
QuestionG 40 (S)KL 400Call
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, “Kramer KL 400”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 KL 400 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 KL 400.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the G 40 (S) and the KL 400.
Which pumps more oil for implements?—20.0 L/min (5.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the G 40 (S).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,490 kg (3,285 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40”1,250 kg (2,756 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the G 40 (S): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40”); the KL 400: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
Which is heavier, for traction?2,345 kg (5,170 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40”1,790 kg (3,946 lb) to 1,950 kg (4,299 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Güldner G 40 (S) is 20% heavier (395 kg / 871 lb) than the Kramer KL 400 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
Which may carry more ballast and load?—2,500 kg (5,512 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the G 40 (S).
Which has the wider choice of gears?8Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40”10Traktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”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”—No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the KL 400.
Which is faster on the road?20 km/h (12.4 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40”20.0 km/h (12.4 mph) to 27.4 km/h (17.0 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
Which offers more PTO speeds?540/1150 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40”585 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the KL 400.
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?—independentTraktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the G 40 (S).
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1963–19691960–1967EvenSame 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 20% heavier (395 kg / 871 lb) than the Kramer KL 400 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
  • 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 KL 400 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
  • Not comparable on three-point lift: the G 40 (S): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Güldner G 40”); the KL 400: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Kramer KL 400”) — 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, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range, PTO speeds and PTO independence.

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