Image not recorded
Head to head · Row Crop
AGCO DT200 vs Challenger MT655C SCR
Image not recorded
ChallengerModel B
Challenger MT655C SCR
Agricultural
- power
- 234 hp
- displacement
- 513 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- Not recorded
AGCOAGCO DT200
vs
ChallengerChallenger MT655C SCR
How they compare
Headline specs vs. the whole Row Crop
Engine Power
▲ DT200 higher · +1 hp (<1%)DT200235 hp
MT655C SCR234 hp
Median Row Crop Tractor138 hp
DT200 is in the 85th percentile; MT655C SCR is in the 84th · 1,206 models
Engine Displacement
▲ MT655C SCR higher · +8 ci (+2%)DT200505 ci
MT655C SCR513 ci
Median Row Crop Tractor391 ci
DT200 is in the 89th percentile; MT655C SCR is in the 92nd · 1,409 models
Cylinders
= Effectively tiedDT2006
MT655C SCR6
Median Row Crop Tractor6
DT200 is in the 50th percentile; MT655C SCR is in the 50th · 1,417 models
Operating Weight
▲ MT655C SCR higher · +6,095 lb (+31%)DT20019,700 lb
MT655C SCR25,795 lb
Median Row Crop Tractor12,307 lb
DT200 is in the 84th percentile; MT655C SCR is in the 95th · 1,350 models
DT200 (A)MT655C SCR (B)Median Row Crop Tractor
Full comparison
Every spec, side by side
General Information
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | AGCO | Challenger | — |
| Model | DT200 | MT655C SCR | — |
| Category | Row Crop | Agricultural | — |
Engine
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | Cummins | Sisu Diesel | — |
| Model | C8.3 | 84CTA | — |
| Power Output | 235hp | 234hp | ▲ DT200+1 hp · <1% |
| Rated RPM | 2,200RPM | 2,200RPM | Same |
| Cylinders | 6 | 6 | Same |
| Displacement | 505ci | 513ci | ▲ MT655C SCR+8 ci · +2% |
| Bore | 4.5in | 4.4in | ▲ DT200+0.1 in · +2% |
| Stroke | 5.3in | 5.7in | ▲ MT655C SCR+0.4 in · +8% |
Transmission
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Full Power Shift | continuously variable transmission (CVT) | — |
Dimensions & Weight
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | 203in | 223in | ▲ MT655C SCR+20 in · +10% |
| Width | 98in | Not recorded | — |
| Height | 121in | 133in | ▲ MT655C SCR+12 in · +10% |
| Operating Weight | 19,700lb | 25,795lb | ▲ MT655C SCR+6,095 lb · +31% |
Hydraulics
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Type | Closed Center Pressure Flow Compensated (PFC) | Closed Center | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic Power | Not recorded | — |
Power Take-off (PTO)
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Independent | Not recorded | — |
| Speed 1 | 1,000rpm | Not recorded | — |
Hitch & Towing
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hitch Type | Three-Point Hitch | Not recorded | — |
| Hitch Category | Category 3/3N | Not recorded | — |
| Hitch Position | Rear | Not recorded | — |
| Hitch Capacity | 19,000lb | Not recorded | — |
Chassis & Drive
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chassis Type | 4x4 MFWD 4WD | Not recorded | — |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Not recorded | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic Power | Not recorded | — |
| Brake Type | Hydraulic Wet Disc | Not recorded | — |
Electrical
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter Type | Electric | Electric Starter | — |
Operator Station
| Spec | AGCO DT200 | Challenger MT655C SCR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Cab Standard | Not recorded | — |
Category context
Both models against the field
Engine Power
median 138 hpA · 85th percentile (235 hp)B · 84th percentile (234 hp)
Engine Displacement
median 391 ciA · 89th percentile (505 ci)B · 92nd percentile (513 ci)
Cylinders
median 6A · 50th percentile (6)B · 50th percentile (6)
Operating Weight
median 12,307 lbA · 84th percentile (19,700 lb)B · 95th percentile (25,795 lb)
Length
median 180 inA · 77th percentile (203 in)B · 92nd percentile (223 in)
A · DT200B · MT655C SCRMedian Row Crop Tractor