Steyr 190 or Warchalowski WT-40?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 190 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the WT-40 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

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 Steyr 190 and Warchalowski WT-40, with the call on each
Question190WT-40Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?26.5 kW (35.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 190”26.5 kW (35.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 190 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the WT-40 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 190 and the WT-40.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 190 and the WT-40.
Which pumps more oil for implements?No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 190 and the WT-40.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,500 kg (3,307 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 190”1,200 kg (2,646 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the 190: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 190”); the WT-40: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
Which is heavier, for traction?1,690 kg (3,726 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 190”1,380 kg (3,042 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Steyr 190 is 22% heavier (310 kg / 683 lb) than the Warchalowski WT-40 (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 190 and the WT-40.
Which has the wider choice of gears?8Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 190”8Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”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 190 and the WT-40.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 190”29 km/h (18.0 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”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?587 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Steyr 190”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the 190.
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 190.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Steyr 190”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1964–19661958–1961Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Steyr 190 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 Steyr 190 is 22% heavier (310 kg / 683 lb) than the Warchalowski WT-40 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Steyr 190 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 drive: all two-wheel drive.
  • Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 190 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the WT-40 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 190: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 190”); the WT-40: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 40”) — 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, a creeper range, PTO speeds and PTO independence.

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