Hanomag C 218 or Warchalowski WT-21?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the C 218 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the WT-21 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

  • The Warchalowski WT-21 suits road haulage better on this data: 51% (9.5 km/h / 5.9 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 Hanomag C 218 and Warchalowski WT-21, with the call on each
QuestionC 218WT-21Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?13.2 kW (17.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag C 218”13.2 kW (17.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 21”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the C 218 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the WT-21 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 C 218 and the WT-21.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the C 218 and the WT-21.
Which pumps more oil for implements?14.0 L/min (3.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag C 218”—No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the WT-21.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?—850 kg (1,874 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 21”No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the C 218.
Which is heavier, for traction?1,375 kg (3,031 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag C 218”855 kg (1,885 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 21”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Hanomag C 218 is 61% heavier (520 kg / 1,146 lb) than the Warchalowski WT-21 (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 C 218 and the WT-21.
Which has the wider choice of gears?6Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag C 218”5 to 6Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 21”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 C 218 and the WT-21.
Which is faster on the road?18.5 km/h (11.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag C 218”28 km/h (17.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 21”AheadThe Warchalowski WT-21 has 51% more top speed (9.5 km/h / 5.9 mph) than the Hanomag C 218 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
Which offers more PTO speeds?1211Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag C 218”540/700 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 21”No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the C 218.
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?—independentTraktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 21”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the C 218.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Hanomag C 218”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 21”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1957–19591968–1969Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Warchalowski WT-21 is newer: production began 11 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Hanomag C 218 is 61% heavier (520 kg / 1,146 lb) than the Warchalowski WT-21 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Warchalowski WT-21 has 51% more top speed (9.5 km/h / 5.9 mph) than the Hanomag C 218 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • The Warchalowski WT-21 is newer: production began 11 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
  • Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
  • Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the C 218 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the WT-21 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, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range, PTO speeds and PTO independence.

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