Fiat 1300 (DT) vs J.I. Case 2096 (DT)

11 material differences · fewer than 12

Tractor one

Fiat 1300 (DT)

1974–1977

No measured PTO figure

Tractor two

J.I. Case 2096 (DT)

1984–1985

No measured PTO figure

Which should you choose?

Read our verdict on the 1300 (DT) and the 2096 (DT) → It is generated from the rows below by a fixed, versioned rule set, and names the figure behind every call.

Field by field

11 material differences · 4 fields identical or within 5%, which is not counted as material

Fiat 1300 (DT) and J.I. Case 2096 (DT), field by field
Field1300 (DT)2096 (DT)Gap
Engine
Engine power, claimed claimed128.2 hp114.1 hp+12% 1300 (DT)
Engine declaredO.M.-FIAT CP-3/100 Var.16CUMMINS B6T-590differs
Displacement declared7.41 L5.88 L+26% 1300 (DT)
Maximum torque declared356 lb·ft · 482 N·m400 lb·ft · 542 N·m+12% 2096 (DT)
Transmission
Top speed declared15.5 mph · 25 km/h18.6 mph · 30 km/h+20% 2096 (DT)
Clutch declaredPedal-operated wet multi-disc driving clutch
Hydraulics & hitch
Pump flow declared12.6 gpm · 47.7 L/min23.0 gpm · 87.1 L/min+83% 2096 (DT)
Pressure declared2,901–3,336 psi · 200–230 bar
Three-point lift at ends declared7,275 lb · 3,300 kg8,250 lb · 3,742 kg+13% 2096 (DT)
Rear PTO speeds declared540/1000 rpm540/1000 rpm
Weight & dimensions
Unladen weight declared12,456 lb · 5,650 kg11,874 lb · 5,386 kg
Wheelbase declared108.3 in · 2,750 mm108.0 in · 2,743 mm
Length declared180.3 in · 4,580 mm171.0 in · 4,343 mm+5% 1300 (DT)
Width declared85.4 in · 2,170 mm101.1 in · 2,567 mm+18% 2096 (DT)
Height declared115.4 in · 2,930 mm118.0 in · 2,997 mm
Ground clearance declared25.0 in · 635 mm16.0 in · 406 mm+56% 1300 (DT)
Turning radius, braked declared14.4 ft · 4.40 m13.1 ft · 3.99 m+10% 1300 (DT)
Fuel tank declared216.6 qt · 205.0 L259.9 qt · 246.0 L+20% 2096 (DT)

Fiat 1300 (DT) sources

Source
  • Source: Traktorenlexikon, “Fiat 1300/1300 DT”
  • Source: Traktorenlexikon, “Someca 1300”

J.I. Case 2096 (DT) sources

Source
  • Source: Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2096”
  • Source: Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1896”