Image not recorded
CaseIHModel A
CaseIH 9270
Four-Wheel Drive
- power
- 335 hp
- displacement
- 855 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- 12
Head to head · Four-Wheel Drive
CaseIH 9270 vs Challenger MT765B
ChallengerModel B
Challenger MT765B
Articulated
- power
- 321 hp
- displacement
- 537 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- 16
CaseIHCaseIH 9270
vs
ChallengerChallenger MT765B
How they compare
Headline specs vs. the whole Four-Wheel Drive
Engine Power
▲ 9270 higher · +14 hp (+4%)9270335 hp
MT765B321 hp
Median Four-Wheel Drive Tractor375 hp
9270 is in the 38th percentile; MT765B is in the 33rd · 162 models
Engine Displacement
▲ 9270 higher · +318 ci (+59%)9270855 ci
MT765B537 ci
Median Four-Wheel Drive Tractor826 ci
9270 is in the 61st percentile; MT765B is in the 13th · 152 models
Cylinders
= Effectively tied92706
MT765B6
Median Four-Wheel Drive Tractor6
9270 is in the 50th percentile; MT765B is in the 50th · 159 models
Forward Gears
▲ MT765B higher · +4 (+33%)927012
MT765B16
Median Four-Wheel Drive Tractor16
9270 is in the 27th percentile; MT765B is in the 50th · 146 models
9270 (A)MT765B (B)Median Four-Wheel Drive Tractor
Full comparison
Every spec, side by side
General Information
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | CaseIH | Challenger | — |
| Model | 9270 | MT765B | — |
| Category | Four-Wheel Drive | Articulated | — |
Engine
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | Cummins | Caterpillar | — |
| Model | NTA-855 | C9 ACERT Tech Tier 3 | — |
| Power Output | 335hp | 321hp | ▲ 9270+14 hp · +4% |
| Rated RPM | 2,100RPM | 2,100RPM | Same |
| Cylinders | 6 | 6 | Same |
| Displacement | 855ci | 537ci | ▲ 9270+318 ci · +59% |
| Bore | 5.5in | 4.4in | ▲ 9270+1.1 in · +25% |
| Stroke | 6in | 5.9in | ▲ 9270+0.1 in · +2% |
Transmission
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Full power shift; fully synchronized | PowerShift | — |
Dimensions & Weight
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | 280in | 233in | ▲ 9270+47 in · +20% |
| Width | 96in | 88in | ▲ 9270+8 in · +9% |
| Height | 150in | 136in | ▲ 9270+14 in · +10% |
| Operating Weight | 34,045lb | 31,085lb | ▲ 9270+2,960 lb · +10% |
Hydraulics
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Type | Closed center load sensing pressure compensating | Closed-center PFC | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic power | Not recorded | — |
Hitch & Towing
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hitch Type | Three-Point Hitch | Standard Cat.3/3N | — |
| Hitch Category | III | Category 3 | — |
| Hitch Position | Rear | Rear | Same |
| Hitch Capacity | Not recorded | 17,263lb | — |
Chassis & Drive
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chassis Type | Not recorded | Tracklayer-rubber tracked | — |
| Drive Type | Not recorded | 4WD | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic power | Not recorded | — |
| Brake Type | Hydraulic wet disc | Wet Disc | — |
Electrical
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter Type | Electric | Electric | Same |
Capacities
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coolant | 16.5gal | Not recorded | — |
Operator Station
| Spec | CaseIH 9270 | Challenger MT765B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Not recorded | Cab | — |
Category context
Both models against the field
Engine Power
median 375 hpA · 38th percentile (335 hp)B · 33rd percentile (321 hp)
Engine Displacement
median 826 ciA · 61st percentile (855 ci)B · 13th percentile (537 ci)
Cylinders
median 6A · 50th percentile (6)B · 50th percentile (6)
Forward Gears
median 16A · 27th percentile (12)B · 50th percentile (16)
Operating Weight
median 37,428 lbA · 41st percentile (34,045 lb)B · 33rd percentile (31,085 lb)
A · 9270B · MT765BMedian Four-Wheel Drive Tractor