Case-IH Puma 195 or John Deere 8110 T?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the Puma 195 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 8110 T has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Case-IH Puma 195 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 12% (14.4 L/min / 3.8 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?
| Question | Puma 195 | 8110 T | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 144.9 kW (194.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 195” | 143.5 kW (192.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Puma 195 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 8110 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 Puma 195 and the 8110 T. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the Puma 195 and the 8110 T. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 134.8 L/min (35.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 195” | 120.4 L/min (31.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | AheadThe Case-IH Puma 195 has 12% more hydraulic flow (14.4 L/min / 3.8 gpm) than the John Deere 8110T (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 4,976 kg (10,971 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the Puma 195. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 8,000 kg (17,637 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 195” | 10,727 kg (23,649 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The John Deere 8110T is 34% heavier (2,727 kg / 6,012 lb) than the Case-IH Puma 195 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 12,000 kg (26,455 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 195” | 14,288 kg (31,500 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | AheadThe John Deere 8110T has 19% higher maximum permissible mass (2,288 kg / 5,044 lb) than the Case-IH Puma 195 (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 18 to 28Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 195” | 16Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | Sources disagreeNo call on forward gears: sources disagree on the figure for the Puma 195. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the Puma 195 and the 8110 T. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 195” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | AheadThe Case-IH Puma 195 has 33% more top speed (10.0 km/h / 6.2 mph) than the John Deere 8110T (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540E/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 195” | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | Sources disagreeNo call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the Puma 195. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 195” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 195”; OECD test report 2425, 2008 | TracksTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 8110T” | DifferDrive differs: the Case-IH Puma 195 4WD and the John Deere 8110T Tracks — tracks and wheels are different kinds of running gear, not called. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 2007–2011 | 2000–2002 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH Puma 195 is newer: production began 7 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Case-IH Puma 195 has 12% more hydraulic flow (14.4 L/min / 3.8 gpm) than the John Deere 8110T (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The John Deere 8110T is 34% heavier (2,727 kg / 6,012 lb) than the Case-IH Puma 195 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The John Deere 8110T has 19% higher maximum permissible mass (2,288 kg / 5,044 lb) than the Case-IH Puma 195 (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH Puma 195 has 33% more top speed (10.0 km/h / 6.2 mph) than the John Deere 8110T (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH Puma 195 is newer: production began 7 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- Drive differs: the Case-IH Puma 195 4WD and the John Deere 8110T Tracks — tracks and wheels are different kinds of running gear, not called.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Puma 195 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 8110 T has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- No call on forward gears: sources disagree on the figure for the Puma 195.
- No call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the Puma 195.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, three-point lift and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources