J.I. Case 2290 or URSUS 1.604?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 2290 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1.604 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The URSUS 1.604 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 18% (823 kg / 1,814 lb) more three-point lift.
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?
| Question | 2290 | 1.604 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 110.3 kW (147.9 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2290” | 110.3 kW (147.9 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1604” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 2290 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1.604 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 2290 and the 1.604. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 2290 and the 1.604. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 79.5 L/min (21.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2290” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 1.604. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 4,500 kg (9,921 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2290” | 5,323 kg (11,735 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1604” | AheadThe URSUS 1.604 has 18% more lift (823 kg / 1,814 lb) than the J.I. Case 2290 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 5,792 kg (12,769 lb) to 6,214 kg (13,700 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2290” | 4,910 kg (10,825 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1604” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The J.I. Case 2290 is 18% heavier (882 kg / 1,944 lb) than the URSUS 1.604 (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 2290 and the 1.604. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2290” | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1604” | 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 2290 and the 1.604. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2290” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1604” | 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? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2290” | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1604” | AheadThe J.I. Case 2290 offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the URSUS 1.604 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2290” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 1.604. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2290” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1604” | AheadThe URSUS 1.604 is available with four-wheel drive; the J.I. Case 2290 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1978–1983 | 1978–1984 | EvenSame 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 URSUS 1.604 has 18% more lift (823 kg / 1,814 lb) than the J.I. Case 2290 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The J.I. Case 2290 is 18% heavier (882 kg / 1,944 lb) than the URSUS 1.604 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The J.I. Case 2290 offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the URSUS 1.604 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The URSUS 1.604 is available with four-wheel drive; the J.I. Case 2290 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- 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 2290 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1.604 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, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources