Case-IH 7150 Magnum or John Deere 8320 T?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 7150 Magnum has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 8320 T has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

  • The John Deere 8320T suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 40% (37.2 L/min / 9.8 gpm) more hydraulic flow.

Generated by rule set compare@4 from the figures on the side-by-side table, allowed by route “the same stated configuration”. Measured figures are compared only with measured, claimed only with claimed, at the same test condition; differences within each figure’s tolerance are not called.

What decides it, question by question?

Buyer questions for Case-IH 7150 Magnum and John Deere 8320 T, with the call on each
Question7150 Magnum8320 TCall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?182 kW (244 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”184 kW (247 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 7150 Magnum has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 8320 T has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
Which turns a litre of fuel into more work at the shaft?——No figureNo call on fuel efficiency at the shaft: no figure on record for the 7150 Magnum and the 8320 T.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 7150 Magnum and the 8320 T.
Which pumps more oil for implements?93.8 L/min (24.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”131.0 L/min (34.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”AheadThe John Deere 8320T has 40% more hydraulic flow (37.2 L/min / 9.8 gpm) than the Case-IH 7150 Magnum (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?7,240 kg (15,961 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”7,500 kg (16,535 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the 7150 Magnum: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”); the 8320 T: lift through the full range at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
Which is heavier, for traction?8,431 kg (18,587 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”12,127 kg (26,735 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The John Deere 8320T is 44% heavier (3,696 kg / 8,148 lb) than the Case-IH 7150 Magnum (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
Which may carry more ballast and load?11,575 kg (25,519 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”14,288 kg (31,500 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”AheadThe John Deere 8320T has 23% higher maximum permissible mass (2,713 kg / 5,981 lb) than the Case-IH 7150 Magnum (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source).
Which has the wider choice of gears?18 to 24Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”16Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”Sources disagreeNo call on forward gears: sources disagree on the figure for the 8320 T.
Which offers a creeper range?——No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 7150 Magnum and the 8320 T.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which offers more PTO speeds?1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”Sources disagreeNo call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the 8320 T.
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”independentTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
Which drives on both axles?4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”TracksTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”; OECD test report 2043, 2003DifferDrive differs: the Case-IH 7150 Magnum 4WD and the John Deere 8320T Tracks — tracks and wheels are different kinds of running gear, not called.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1990–19932002–2005Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The John Deere 8320T is newer: production began 12 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The John Deere 8320T has 40% more hydraulic flow (37.2 L/min / 9.8 gpm) than the Case-IH 7150 Magnum (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The John Deere 8320T is 44% heavier (3,696 kg / 8,148 lb) than the Case-IH 7150 Magnum (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The John Deere 8320T has 23% higher maximum permissible mass (2,713 kg / 5,981 lb) than the Case-IH 7150 Magnum (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source).
  • The John Deere 8320T is newer: production began 12 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
  • Drive differs: the Case-IH 7150 Magnum 4WD and the John Deere 8320T Tracks — tracks and wheels are different kinds of running gear, not called.
  • Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 7150 Magnum has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 8320 T has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
  • Not comparable on three-point lift: the 7150 Magnum: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH 7150”); the 8320 T: lift through the full range at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8320T”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
  • No call on forward gears: sources disagree on the figure for the 8320 T.
  • No call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the 8320 T.
  • No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power and a creeper range.

← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources