J.I. Case 2590 or J.I. Case 3294?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 2590 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 3294 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The J.I. Case 3294 suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: 14% (986 kg / 2,174 lb) heavier and 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?
| Question | 2590 | 3294 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 147.1 kW (197.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2590” | 144.9 kW (194.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 2590 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 3294 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 2590 and the 3294. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 2590 and the 3294. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | 87.1 L/min (23.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 2590. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 3,628 kg (7,998 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2590” | 2,993 kg (6,598 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the 2590: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2590”); the 3294: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 7,140 kg (15,741 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2590” | 8,126 kg (17,915 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The J.I. Case 3294 is 14% heavier (986 kg / 2,174 lb) than the J.I. Case 2590 (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 2590 and the 3294. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2590” | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | 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 2590 and the 3294. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2590” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | 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? | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2590” | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2590” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2590” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | AheadThe J.I. Case 3294 is available with four-wheel drive; the J.I. Case 2590 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1978–1983 | 1984–1985 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The J.I. Case 3294 is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The J.I. Case 3294 is 14% heavier (986 kg / 2,174 lb) than the J.I. Case 2590 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The J.I. Case 3294 is available with four-wheel drive; the J.I. Case 2590 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The J.I. Case 3294 is newer: production began 6 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 difference is under the 25% 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 (1000 rpm).
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 2590 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 3294 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the 2590: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2590”); the 3294: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources