URSUS 1734 or WHITE 170?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 1734 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 170 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The URSUS 1734 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 93% (3,353 kg / 7,392 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 | 1734 | 170 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 125 kW (168 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | 123.6 kW (165.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “White 170” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 1734 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 170 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 1734 and the 170. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1734 and the 170. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 58.0 L/min (15.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 170. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 6,966 kg (15,357 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | 3,613 kg (7,965 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “White 170” | AheadThe URSUS 1734 has 93% more lift (3,353 kg / 7,392 lb) than the WHITE 170 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 5,590 kg (12,324 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | 6,033 kg (13,300 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “White 170” | 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 1734 and the 170. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 12 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | 18Traktorenlexikon, “White 170” | 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 1734 and the 170. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “White 170” | 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, “Ursus 1734” | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “White 170” | AheadThe URSUS 1734 offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the WHITE 170 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “White 170” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “White 170” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1998–2004 | 1990–1992 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The URSUS 1734 is newer: production began 8 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The URSUS 1734 has 93% more lift (3,353 kg / 7,392 lb) than the WHITE 170 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The URSUS 1734 offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the WHITE 170 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The URSUS 1734 is newer: production began 8 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- 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 difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 1734 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 170 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 and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources