OLIVER 1355 (4 WD) or URSUS C-360?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the URSUS C-360: hydraulic flow. On features, the OLIVER 1355 (4 WD) is ahead on drive.

  • The URSUS C-360 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 21% (4.5 L/min / 1.2 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
  • The OLIVER 1355 (4 WD) 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 OLIVER 1355 (4 WD) and URSUS C-360, with the call on each
Question1355 (4 WD)C-360Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?35.1 kW (47.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1355”34.8 kW (46.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-360”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 1355 (4 WD) and the C-360.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1355 (4 WD) and the C-360.
Which pumps more oil for implements?21.8 L/min (5.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1355”26.3 L/min (6.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-360”AheadThe URSUS C-360 has 21% more hydraulic flow (4.5 L/min / 1.2 gpm) than the OLIVER 1355 (4 WD) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?—1,200 kg (2,646 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-360”No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 1355 (4 WD).
Which is heavier, for traction?2,000 kg (4,409 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1355”2,170 kg (4,784 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-360”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 1355 (4 WD) and the C-360.
Which has the wider choice of gears?8 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1355”10Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-360”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 1355 (4 WD) and the C-360.
Which is faster on the road?25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1355”25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-360”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, “Oliver 1355”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-360”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?—independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-360”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 1355 (4 WD).
Which drives on both axles?Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1355”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus C-360”AheadThe OLIVER 1355 (4 WD) is available with four-wheel drive; the URSUS C-360 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
Which is newer, and what about parts?1969–19711976–1994Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The URSUS C-360 is newer: production began 7 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-360 has 21% more hydraulic flow (4.5 L/min / 1.2 gpm) than the OLIVER 1355 (4 WD) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The OLIVER 1355 (4 WD) is available with four-wheel drive; the URSUS C-360 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
  • The URSUS C-360 is newer: production began 7 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
  • 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, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.

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