Image not recorded
CaseIHModel A
CaseIH Puma 145
Row Crop
- power
- 146 hp
- displacement
- 411 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- 18
Head to head · Row Crop
CaseIH Puma 145 vs McCormick Intl X70.40
Image not recorded
McCormick IntlModel B
McCormick Intl X70.40
Row Crop
- power
- 150 hp
- displacement
- 411 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- 32
CaseIHCaseIH Puma 145
vs
McCormick IntlMcCormick Intl X70.40
How they compare
Headline specs vs. the whole Row Crop
Engine Power
▲ X70.40 higher · +4 hp (+3%)Puma 145146 hp
X70.40150 hp
Median Row Crop Tractor138 hp
Puma 145 is in the 55th percentile; X70.40 is in the 57th · 1,206 models
Engine Displacement
= Effectively tiedPuma 145411 ci
X70.40411 ci
Median Row Crop Tractor391 ci
Puma 145 is in the 60th percentile; X70.40 is in the 60th · 1,409 models
Cylinders
= Effectively tiedPuma 1456
X70.406
Median Row Crop Tractor6
Puma 145 is in the 50th percentile; X70.40 is in the 50th · 1,417 models
Forward Gears
▲ X70.40 higher · +14 (+78%)Puma 14518
X70.4032
Median Row Crop Tractor16
Puma 145 is in the 61st percentile; X70.40 is in the 91st · 1,200 models
Puma 145 (A)X70.40 (B)Median Row Crop Tractor
Full comparison
Every spec, side by side
General Information
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | CaseIH | McCormick Intl | — |
| Model | Puma 145 | X70.40 | — |
| Category | Row Crop | Row Crop | Same |
Engine
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | FPT | McCormick Intl | — |
| Model | Not recorded | BetaPower | — |
| Power Output | 146hp | 150hp | ▲ X70.40+4 hp · +3% |
| Rated RPM | 2,200RPM | 2,200RPM | Same |
| Cylinders | 6 | 6 | Same |
| Displacement | 411ci | 411ci | Same |
| Bore | 4.1in | 4.1in | Same |
| Stroke | 5.2in | 5.2in | Same |
Transmission
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Full power shift | Eight-speed power shift | — |
Dimensions & Weight
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | Not recorded | 205in | — |
| Width | 61.4in | 94.5in | ▲ X70.40+33.1 in · +54% |
| Height | Not recorded | 114in | — |
| Operating Weight | 14,350lb | 14,330lb | ▲ Puma 145+20 lb · <1% |
Hydraulics
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Type | Closed center pressure flow compensating (PFC) | Not recorded | — |
| Steering Type | Not recorded | Hydrostatic power | — |
Power Take-off (PTO)
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Not recorded | Optional Transmission or Live PTO | — |
Hitch & Towing
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hitch Type | 2/3N | Not recorded | — |
| Hitch Position | Rear | Not recorded | — |
Chassis & Drive
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chassis Type | 4x4 MFWD 4WD | 4x4 MFWD 4WD | Same |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD | Same |
| Steering Type | Not recorded | Hydrostatic power | — |
| Brake Type | Electro-hydraulic wet disc | Not recorded | — |
Electrical
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter Type | Electric | Electric | Same |
Emissions
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 145 | McCormick Intl X70.40 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard | Interim Tier 4 | Not recorded | — |
| Control System | Selective catalytic reduction (SCR) | SCR | — |
Category context
Both models against the field
Engine Power
median 138 hpA · 55th percentile (146 hp)B · 57th percentile (150 hp)
Engine Displacement
median 391 ciA · 60th percentile (411 ci)B · 60th percentile (411 ci)
Cylinders
median 6A · 50th percentile (6)B · 50th percentile (6)
Forward Gears
median 16A · 61st percentile (18)B · 91st percentile (32)
Operating Weight
median 12,307 lbA · 63rd percentile (14,350 lb)B · 63rd percentile (14,330 lb)
A · Puma 145B · X70.40Median Row Crop Tractor