IMT 560 or VALMET 4100?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the VALMET 4100: three-point lift. It is also ahead on forward gears and drive.

  • The VALMET 4100 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 63% (1,100 kg / 2,425 lb) more three-point lift.
  • The VALMET 4100 suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: four-wheel drive.

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 560 and VALMET 4100, with the call on each
Question5604100Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?32.2 kW (43.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”32.5 kW (43.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 4100”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 560 and the 4100.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 560 and the 4100.
Which pumps more oil for implements?39.0 L/min (10.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 4100”No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 560.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,755 kg (3,869 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”2,855 kg (6,294 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 4100”AheadThe VALMET 4100 has 63% more lift (1,100 kg / 2,425 lb) than the IMT 560 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
Which is heavier, for traction?2,470 kg (5,445 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”2,660 kg (5,864 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 4100”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 560 and the 4100.
Which has the wider choice of gears?6Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”8 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 4100”AheadThe VALMET 4100 has 33% more forward gears (2 gears) than the IMT 560 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
Which offers a creeper range?No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 560 and the 4100.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 4100”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 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”540E/540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 4100”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 4100”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 560.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 560”2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 4100”AheadThe VALMET 4100 is available with four-wheel drive; the IMT 560 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
Which is newer, and what about parts?1980–19861993–1996Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The VALMET 4100 is newer: production began 13 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The VALMET 4100 has 63% more lift (1,100 kg / 2,425 lb) than the IMT 560 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
  • The VALMET 4100 has 33% more forward gears (2 gears) than the IMT 560 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
  • The VALMET 4100 is available with four-wheel drive; the IMT 560 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
  • The VALMET 4100 is newer: production began 13 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 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).
  • 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