IMT 588 or IMT 560?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the IMT 560: three-point lift. It is also ahead on top speed.

  • The IMT 560 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 57% (635 kg / 1,400 lb) more three-point lift.
  • The IMT 560 suits road haulage better on this data: 36% (8.0 km/h / 5.0 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 IMT 588 and IMT 560, with the call on each
Question588560Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?32.2 kW (43.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”32.2 kW (43.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”EvenEven on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call.
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 588 and the 560.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 588 and the 560.
Which pumps more oil for implements?15.1 L/min (4.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 560.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,120 kg (2,469 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”1,755 kg (3,869 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”AheadThe IMT 560 has 57% more lift (635 kg / 1,400 lb) than the IMT 588 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
Which is heavier, for traction?2,300 kg (5,071 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”2,470 kg (5,445 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”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 588 and the 560.
Which has the wider choice of gears?6Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”6Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”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?No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 588 and the 560.
Which is faster on the road?22 km/h (13.7 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”AheadThe IMT 560 has 36% more top speed (8.0 km/h / 5.0 mph) than the IMT 588 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
Which offers more PTO speeds?540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 588 and the 560.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1970–19801980–1986Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The IMT 560 is newer: production began 10 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The IMT 560 has 57% more lift (635 kg / 1,400 lb) than the IMT 588 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
  • The IMT 560 has 36% more top speed (8.0 km/h / 5.0 mph) than the IMT 588 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • The IMT 560 is newer: production began 10 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • Even on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call.
  • 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 difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
  • Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
  • 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 and PTO independence.

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