- Home/
- Comparison/
- Two-Wheel Drive Tractor/
- McCormick CX95 vs. Challenger MT565B 2WD
McCormick CX95 vs. Challenger MT565B 2WD
7 reasons to buy Challenger MT565B 2WD:
Operation
| Fuel Capacity | 370 l. and 155 l. | 58 % more or 215 l. |
| Hydraulic system fluid volume | 70 l. and 34.5 l. | 51 % more or 35.5 l. |
| Three-point hitch load-carrying capacity at 24 inches | 6479 kg and 3875 kg | 40 % more or 2604 kg |
Motor
| Displacement | 6.6 l. and 4.4 l. | 33 % more or 2.2 l. |
| Cylinders number | 6 and 4 | 33 % more or 2 |
Hydraulic system
| Pump bandwidth | 180 l/min and 60 l/min | 67 % more or 120 l/min |
Gear box
| Maximum speed | 40.2 km/h and 40 km/h | 0 % more or 0.2 km/h |
Neutral reasons:
Sizes
| Height with rollover protection system | 2540 mm and 3118 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2237 mm and 2890 mm |
| Dimensional length | 4209 mm and 4842 mm |
| Overall width | 2147 mm and 2060 mm |
Operation
| Working weight | 3285 kg and 6803.9 kg |
Motor
| Aspiration | Turbocharger with wastegate and Turbocharging with subsequent air cooling (by a cooling radiator) |
| Power measured at | 2200 rev / min and 2200 rev / min |
Gear box
| Transmission type | Powershift / power drive and automatic transmission system with power gear shifting |
Images
Sizes
| 1. Dimensional length | 4209 mm | 1. Dimensional length | 4842 mm |
| 2. Overall width | 2147 mm | 2. Overall width | 2060 mm |
| 3. Height with rollover protection system | 2540 mm | 3. Height with rollover protection system | 3118 mm |
| 4. Wheelbase | 2237 mm | 4. Wheelbase | 2890 mm |