CaseIHModel A
CaseIH Puma 165
Row Crop
- power
- 165 hp
- displacement
- 411 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- 18
Head to head · Row Crop
CaseIH Puma 165 vs McCormick Intl X70.50
Image not recorded
McCormick IntlModel B
McCormick Intl X70.50
Row Crop
- power
- 165 hp
- displacement
- 411 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- 32
CaseIHCaseIH Puma 165
vs
McCormick IntlMcCormick Intl X70.50
How they compare
Headline specs vs. the whole Row Crop
Engine Power
= Effectively tiedPuma 165165 hp
X70.50165 hp
Median Row Crop Tractor138 hp
Puma 165 is in the 65th percentile; X70.50 is in the 65th · 1,206 models
Engine Displacement
= Effectively tiedPuma 165411 ci
X70.50411 ci
Median Row Crop Tractor391 ci
Puma 165 is in the 63rd percentile; X70.50 is in the 60th · 1,409 models
Cylinders
= Effectively tiedPuma 1656
X70.506
Median Row Crop Tractor6
Puma 165 is in the 50th percentile; X70.50 is in the 50th · 1,417 models
Forward Gears
▲ X70.50 higher · +14 (+78%)Puma 16518
X70.5032
Median Row Crop Tractor16
Puma 165 is in the 61st percentile; X70.50 is in the 91st · 1,200 models
Puma 165 (A)X70.50 (B)Median Row Crop Tractor
Full comparison
Every spec, side by side
General Information
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | CaseIH | McCormick Intl | — |
| Model | Puma 165 | X70.50 | — |
| Category | Row Crop | Row Crop | Same |
Engine
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | CNH / FPT | Not recorded | — |
| Model | Not recorded | BetaPower | — |
| Power Output | 165hp | 165hp | Same |
| 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 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Full power shift | Eight-speed power shift | — |
Dimensions & Weight
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | Not recorded | 205in | — |
| Width | Not recorded | 94.5in | — |
| Height | 120in | 114in | ▲ Puma 165+6 in · +5% |
| Operating Weight | 17,725lb | 14,330lb | ▲ Puma 165+3,395 lb · +24% |
Hydraulics
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Type | Closed center pressure flow compensating | Not recorded | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic Power | Hydrostatic power | Same |
Tires
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Front Tire Size | 16.9-30 | Not recorded | — |
| Rear Tire Size | 20.8-42 | Not recorded | — |
Hitch & Towing
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hitch Category | II/IIIN | Not recorded | — |
| Hitch Position | Rear | Not recorded | — |
Chassis & Drive
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chassis Type | 4x4 MFWD 4WD | 4x4 MFWD 4WD | Same |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD | Same |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic Power | Hydrostatic power | Same |
Electrical
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter Type | Electric | Electric | Same |
Operator Station
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 165 | McCormick Intl X70.50 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Not recorded | Cab | — |
Category context
Both models against the field
Engine Power
median 138 hpA · 65th percentile (165 hp)B · 65th percentile (165 hp)
Engine Displacement
median 391 ciA · 63rd 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 · 76th percentile (17,725 lb)B · 63rd percentile (14,330 lb)
A · Puma 165B · X70.50Median Row Crop Tractor