J.I. Case 2294 (DT) or VALMET 2005-4?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 2294 (DT) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2005-4 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

  • The VALMET 2005-4 suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: four-wheel drive.

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 J.I. Case 2294 (DT) and VALMET 2005-4, with the call on each
Question2294 (DT)2005-4Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?103.7 kW (139.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”103 kW (138 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 2005”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 2294 (DT) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2005-4 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 2294 (DT) and the 2005-4.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 2294 (DT) and the 2005-4.
Which pumps more oil for implements?—62.6 L/min (16.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 2005”No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 2294 (DT).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?4,535 kg (9,998 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”4,720 kg (10,406 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 2005”EvenEven on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which is heavier, for traction?6,527 kg (14,390 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”6,335 kg (13,966 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 2005”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?——No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 2294 (DT) and the 2005-4.
Which has the wider choice of gears?12Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”16Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 2005”AheadThe VALMET 2005-4 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the J.I. Case 2294 (DT) (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
Which offers a creeper range?——No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 2294 (DT) and the 2005-4.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 2005”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?540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 2005”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”—No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 2005-4.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 2005”AheadThe VALMET 2005-4 is available with four-wheel drive; the J.I. Case 2294 (DT) is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
Which is newer, and what about parts?1984–19851986–1987EvenSame 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?

  • The VALMET 2005-4 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the J.I. Case 2294 (DT) (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
  • The VALMET 2005-4 is available with four-wheel drive; the J.I. Case 2294 (DT) is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
  • Even on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
  • 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 difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
  • 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 2294 (DT) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2005-4 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
  • No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.

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