IMT 588 or URSUS C-350?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the URSUS C-350: hydraulic flow. It is also ahead on forward gears and top speed.

  • The URSUS C-350 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 32% (4.9 L/min / 1.3 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
  • The URSUS C-350 suits road haulage better on this data: 14% (3.0 km/h / 1.9 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 IMT 588 and URSUS C-350, with the call on each
Question588C-350Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?32.2 kW (43.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”32.4 kW (43.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-350”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 C-350.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 588 and the C-350.
Which pumps more oil for implements?15.1 L/min (4.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”20.0 L/min (5.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-350”AheadThe URSUS C-350 has 32% more hydraulic flow (4.9 L/min / 1.3 gpm) than the IMT 588 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,120 kg (2,469 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”1,200 kg (2,646 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-350”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?2,300 kg (5,071 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”2,146 kg (4,731 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-350”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 C-350.
Which has the wider choice of gears?6Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”10Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-350”AheadThe URSUS C-350 has 67% more forward gears (4 gears) than the IMT 588 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
Which offers a creeper range?No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 588 and the C-350.
Which is faster on the road?22 km/h (13.7 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-350”AheadThe URSUS C-350 has 14% more top speed (3.0 km/h / 1.9 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, “Ursus C-350”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 C-350.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 558”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-350”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1970–19801965–1970Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The IMT 588 is newer: production began 5 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The URSUS C-350 has 32% more hydraulic flow (4.9 L/min / 1.3 gpm) than the IMT 588 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The URSUS C-350 has 67% more forward gears (4 gears) than the IMT 588 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
  • The URSUS C-350 has 14% more top speed (3.0 km/h / 1.9 mph) than the IMT 588 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • The IMT 588 is newer: production began 5 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 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 weight (both unladen weight, 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.
  • No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.

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