CaseIHModel A
CaseIH Puma 195
Row Crop
- power
- 195 hp
- displacement
- 411 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- Not recorded
Head to head · Row Crop
CaseIH Puma 195 vs McCormick Intl X70.70
Image not recorded
McCormick IntlModel B
McCormick Intl X70.70
Row Crop
- power
- 188 hp
- displacement
- 411 ci
- Cylinders
- 6
- Forward gears
- 32
CaseIHCaseIH Puma 195
vs
McCormick IntlMcCormick Intl X70.70
How they compare
Headline specs vs. the whole Row Crop
Engine Power
▲ Puma 195 higher · +7 hp (+4%)Puma 195195 hp
X70.70188 hp
Median Row Crop Tractor138 hp
Puma 195 is in the 75th percentile; X70.70 is in the 72nd · 1,206 models
Engine Displacement
= Effectively tiedPuma 195411 ci
X70.70411 ci
Median Row Crop Tractor391 ci
Puma 195 is in the 63rd percentile; X70.70 is in the 60th · 1,409 models
Cylinders
= Effectively tiedPuma 1956
X70.706
Median Row Crop Tractor6
Puma 195 is in the 50th percentile; X70.70 is in the 50th · 1,417 models
Operating Weight
▲ Puma 195 higher · +655 lb (+4%)Puma 19517,635 lb
X70.7016,980 lb
Median Row Crop Tractor12,307 lb
Puma 195 is in the 75th percentile; X70.70 is in the 74th · 1,350 models
Puma 195 (A)X70.70 (B)Median Row Crop Tractor
Full comparison
Every spec, side by side
General Information
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | CaseIH | McCormick Intl | — |
| Model | Puma 195 | X70.70 | — |
| Category | Row Crop | Row Crop | Same |
Engine
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | CNH | Not recorded | — |
| Model | Not recorded | BetaPower | — |
| Power Output | 195hp | 188hp | ▲ Puma 195+7 hp · +4% |
| 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 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Full power shift | Eight-speed power shift | — |
Dimensions & Weight
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | Not recorded | 209in | — |
| Width | Not recorded | 95.1in | — |
| Height | 123in | 118in | ▲ Puma 195+5 in · +4% |
| Operating Weight | 17,635lb | 16,980lb | ▲ Puma 195+655 lb · +4% |
Hydraulics
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Type | Pressure flow compensating (PFC) | Not recorded | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic power | Hydrostatic power | Same |
Hitch & Towing
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hitch Type | Three-Point Hitch | Three-Point Hitch | Same |
| Hitch Category | II/IIIN | III | — |
| Hitch Position | Rear | Not recorded | — |
Chassis & Drive
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chassis Type | 4x2 2WD | 4x4 MFWD 4WD | — |
| Drive Type | Not recorded | 4WD | — |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic power | Hydrostatic power | Same |
Electrical
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter Type | Electric | Electric | Same |
Emissions
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control System | Not recorded | SCR | — |
Operator Station
| Spec | CaseIH Puma 195 | McCormick Intl X70.70 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Cab | Cab | Same |
Category context
Both models against the field
Engine Power
median 138 hpA · 75th percentile (195 hp)B · 72nd percentile (188 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)
Operating Weight
median 12,307 lbA · 75th percentile (17,635 lb)B · 74th percentile (16,980 lb)
Height
median 114 inA · 80th percentile (123 in)B · 66th percentile (118 in)
A · Puma 195B · X70.70Median Row Crop Tractor