Case-IH Puma 210 or Massey Ferguson MF 6499 A?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the Puma 210 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 6499 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

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 Puma 210 and Massey Ferguson MF 6499 A, with the call on each
QuestionPuma 210MF 6499 ACall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?156.7 kW (210.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 210”158.2 kW (212.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6499”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Puma 210 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 6499 A 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 210 and the MF 6499 A.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the Puma 210 and the MF 6499 A.
Which pumps more oil for implements?——No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the Puma 210 and the MF 6499 A.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?10,460 kg (23,060 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 210”—No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the MF 6499 A.
Which is heavier, for traction?8,200 kg (18,078 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 210”7,860 kg (17,328 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6499”EvenEven on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which may carry more ballast and load?12,000 kg (26,455 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 210”—No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the MF 6499 A.
Which has the wider choice of gears?18 to 28Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 210”24 to 32Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6499”Sources disagreeNo call on forward gears: sources disagree on the figure for the Puma 210.
Which offers a creeper range?——No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the Puma 210 and the MF 6499 A.
Which is faster on the road?40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 210”40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6499”EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
Which offers more PTO speeds?540E/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 210”540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6499”Sources disagreeNo call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the Puma 210.
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 210”independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6499”EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
Which drives on both axles?4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH Puma 210”; OECD test report 2427, 20084WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6499”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?2007–20112004–2011EvenSame era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • Even on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
  • Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
  • Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
  • Same era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Puma 210 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 6499 A 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 210.
  • No call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the Puma 210.
  • No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, hydraulic flow, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.

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