Image not recorded
Head to head · Row Crop
AGCO DT225 vs CaseIH Puma 225
Image not recorded
CaseIHModel B
CaseIH Puma 225
Agricultural
- power
- 225 hp
- displacement
- 411 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- Not recorded
AGCOAGCO DT225
vs
CaseIHCaseIH Puma 225
How they compare
Headline specs vs. the whole Row Crop
Engine Power
= Effectively tiedDT225225 hp
Puma 225225 hp
Median Row Crop Tractor138 hp
DT225 is in the 83rd percentile; Puma 225 is in the 83rd · 1,206 models
Engine Displacement
▲ DT225 higher · +94 ci (+23%)DT225505 ci
Puma 225411 ci
Median Row Crop Tractor391 ci
DT225 is in the 89th percentile; Puma 225 is in the 63rd · 1,409 models
Cylinders
= Effectively tiedDT2256
Puma 2256
Median Row Crop Tractor6
DT225 is in the 50th percentile; Puma 225 is in the 50th · 1,417 models
Operating Weight
▲ DT225 higher · +3,200 lb (+19%)DT22519,700 lb
Puma 22516,500 lb
Median Row Crop Tractor12,307 lb
DT225 is in the 84th percentile; Puma 225 is in the 72nd · 1,350 models
DT225 (A)Puma 225 (B)Median Row Crop Tractor
Full comparison
Every spec, side by side
General Information
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | AGCO | CaseIH | — |
| Model | DT225 | Puma 225 | — |
| Category | Row Crop | Agricultural | — |
Engine
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | Cummins | CDC | — |
| Model | C8.3L | 24-valve | — |
| Power Output | 225hp | 225hp | Same |
| Rated RPM | 2,200RPM | 2,200RPM | Same |
| Cylinders | 6 | 6 | Same |
| Displacement | 505ci | 411ci | ▲ DT225+94 ci · +23% |
| Bore | 4.5in | 4.1in | ▲ DT225+0.4 in · +10% |
| Stroke | 5.3in | 5.2in | ▲ DT225+0.1 in · +2% |
Transmission
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Full power shift | Continuously variable transmission (CVT) | — |
Dimensions & Weight
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | 203in | Not recorded | — |
| Width | 98in | Not recorded | — |
| Height | 121in | 123in | ▲ Puma 225+2 in · +2% |
| Operating Weight | 19,700lb | 16,500lb | ▲ DT225+3,200 lb · +19% |
Hydraulics
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Type | Closed center pressure flow compensated (PFC) | Pressure flow compensating (PFC) | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic power | Power | — |
Power Take-off (PTO)
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Independent | Not recorded | — |
| Speed 1 | 1,000rpm | Not recorded | — |
Hitch & Towing
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hitch Type | Three-Point Hitch | Not recorded | — |
| Hitch Category | Category 3/3N | 2/3N | — |
| Hitch Position | Rear | Rear | Same |
| Hitch Capacity | 19,005lb | Not recorded | — |
Chassis & Drive
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chassis Type | 4x4 MFWD 4WD | Not recorded | — |
| Drive Type | MFWD | Not recorded | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic power | Power | — |
| Brake Type | Hydraulic wet disc | Not recorded | — |
Electrical
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter Type | Electric | Electric | Same |
Operator Station
| Spec | AGCO DT225 | CaseIH Puma 225 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Cab | Cab | Same |
Category context
Both models against the field
Engine Power
median 138 hpA · 83rd percentile (225 hp)B · 83rd percentile (225 hp)
Engine Displacement
median 391 ciA · 89th percentile (505 ci)B · 63rd percentile (411 ci)
Cylinders
median 6A · 50th percentile (6)B · 50th percentile (6)
Operating Weight
median 12,307 lbA · 84th percentile (19,700 lb)B · 72nd percentile (16,500 lb)
Height
median 114 inA · 75th percentile (121 in)B · 80th percentile (123 in)
A · DT225B · Puma 225Median Row Crop Tractor