Image not recorded
Ascot UniversalModel A
Ascot Universal 300
Sub-Compact
- power
- 27.5 hp
- displacement
- 95.2 ci
- Cylinders
- 2
- Forward gears
- 9
Head to head · Sub-Compact
Ascot Universal 300 vs Challenger MT255
Image not recorded
ChallengerModel B
Challenger MT255
Utility
- power
- 28.4 hp
- displacement
- 89.3 ci
- Cylinders
- 3
- Forward gears
- 9
Ascot UniversalAscot Universal 300
vs
ChallengerChallenger MT255
How they compare
Headline specs vs. the whole Sub-Compact
Engine Power
▲ MT255 higher · +0.9 hp (+3%)30027.5 hp
MT25528.4 hp
Median Sub-Compact Tractor26.9 hp
300 is in the 51st percentile; MT255 is in the 54th · 816 models
Engine Displacement
▲ 300 higher · +5.9 ci (+7%)30095.2 ci
MT25589.3 ci
Median Sub-Compact Tractor91.4 ci
300 is in the 55th percentile; MT255 is in the 47th · 757 models
Cylinders
▲ MT255 higher · +1 (+50%)3002
MT2553
Median Sub-Compact Tractor3
300 is in the 11th percentile; MT255 is in the 50th · 802 models
Forward Gears
= Effectively tied3009
MT2559
Median Sub-Compact Tractor9
300 is in the 50th percentile; MT255 is in the 50th · 616 models
300 (A)MT255 (B)Median Sub-Compact Tractor
Full comparison
Every spec, side by side
General Information
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Challenger MT255 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | Ascot Universal | Challenger | — |
| Model | 300 | MT255 | — |
| Category | Sub-Compact | Utility | — |
Engine
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Challenger MT255 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | UTB | Iseki | — |
| Power Output | 27.5hp | 28.4hp | ▲ MT255+0.9 hp · +3% |
| Rated RPM | 2,400RPM | 2,500RPM | ▲ MT255+100 RPM · +4% |
| Cylinders | 2 | 3 | ▲ MT255+1 · +50% |
| Displacement | 95.2ci | 89.3ci | ▲ 300+5.9 ci · +7% |
| Bore | 3.7in | 3.4in | ▲ 300+0.3 in · +9% |
| Stroke | 4.3in | 3.3in | ▲ 300+1 in · +30% |
Transmission
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Challenger MT255 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Constant Mesh | Constant mesh | Same |
Dimensions & Weight
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Challenger MT255 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | Not recorded | 117in | — |
| Width | Not recorded | 51in | — |
| Height | Not recorded | 79.3in | — |
| Operating Weight | 3,800lb | 2,248lb | ▲ 300+1,552 lb · +69% |
Hydraulics
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Challenger MT255 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Type | Open Center | Open Center | Same |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic Power | Power | — |
Hitch & Towing
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Challenger MT255 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hitch Type | Three-Point Hitch | CAT I | — |
| Hitch Category | II/I | I | — |
| Hitch Position | Rear | Rear | Same |
| Hitch Capacity | Not recorded | 1,323lb | — |
Chassis & Drive
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Challenger MT255 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chassis Type | 4x2 2WD | 4x4 MFWD 4WD | — |
| Drive Type | 2WD | 4WD | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic Power | Power | — |
Electrical
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Challenger MT255 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter Type | Electric | Electric | Same |
Operator Station
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Challenger MT255 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Not recorded | Open, ROPS | — |
Category context
Both models against the field
Engine Power
median 26.9 hpA · 51st percentile (27.5 hp)B · 54th percentile (28.4 hp)
Engine Displacement
median 91.4 ciA · 55th percentile (95.2 ci)B · 47th percentile (89.3 ci)
Cylinders
median 3A · 11th percentile (2)B · 50th percentile (3)
Forward Gears
median 9A · 50th percentile (9)B · 50th percentile (9)
Operating Weight
median 2,700 lbA · 73rd percentile (3,800 lb)B · 41st percentile (2,248 lb)
A · 300B · MT255Median Sub-Compact Tractor