OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) or ZETOR 6711?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the OLIVER 1450 (4 WD): hydraulic flow.
- The OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 33% (6.5 L/min / 1.7 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
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 | 1450 (4 WD) | 6711 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 40.3 kW (54.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | 40.5 kW (54.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 6711” | 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 1450 (4 WD) and the 6711. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1450 (4 WD) and the 6711. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 26.5 L/min (7.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | 20.0 L/min (5.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 6711” | AheadThe OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) has 33% more hydraulic flow (6.5 L/min / 1.7 gpm) than the ZETOR 6711 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,825 kg (4,023 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | — | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 6711. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,720 kg (5,997 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | 2,620 kg (5,776 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 6711” | 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 1450 (4 WD) and the 6711. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 7 to 14Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | 10 to 20Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 6711” | 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 1450 (4 WD) and the 6711. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 23 km/h (14.3 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 6711” | 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 1450” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Zetor 6711” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 6711. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Zetor 6711” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1967–1969 | 1972–1977 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The ZETOR 6711 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 OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) has 33% more hydraulic flow (6.5 L/min / 1.7 gpm) than the ZETOR 6711 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The ZETOR 6711 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 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).
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- 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