Head to head
ABB IRB 6640 vs KUKA KR 300 R2500
A specification duel across payload, reach, precision, and footprint, with a plain read on which arm suits which job.
Heavy-payload foundry-proven material handler
High payload robot for heavy parts and tooling
Specification duel
Green marks the stronger figure. Unconfirmed specs are shown but not scored.
The verdict
The specs separate them here: the KUKA KR 300 R2500 carries more, 300 kg to the ABB IRB 6640's 235 kg. If precision drives the job, the ABB IRB 6640 holds the tighter repeatability at ±0.05 mm. They run different controllers, the ABB IRB 6640 on the IRC5 and the KUKA KR 300 R2500 on the KR C4, so whichever platform your team already programs and stocks parts for is a real tiebreaker. For a tight or overhead cell, the KUKA KR 300 R2500 lists Ceiling mounting, which the other does not. Both are aimed at material handling and machine tending, with the KUKA KR 300 R2500 to press tending.
- Proven in foundry and press-tending duty
- High payload with foundry-sealed options
- Rigid structure holds accuracy under load
- Long service life in continuous operation
- High payload with a manageable footprint
- Rigid arm structure for heavy tooling
- Good repeatability given its load class
- Established support network
Common questions
- Which has more payload, the ABB IRB 6640 or the KUKA KR 300 R2500?
- The KUKA KR 300 R2500 has more payload at 300 kg versus 235 kg.
- Which reaches farther?
- The ABB IRB 6640 has more reach at 2550 mm versus 2496 mm.
- Which is more precise?
- The ABB IRB 6640 holds tighter repeatability at ±0.05 mm.
- Should I choose the ABB IRB 6640 or the KUKA KR 300 R2500?
- Match the pick to the job. The ABB IRB 6640 is a 6-axis industrial arm at 235 kg and 2550 mm. The KUKA KR 300 R2500 is a 6-axis industrial arm at 300 kg and 2496 mm.