J.I. Case 2294 (DT) or VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 2005?

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 Volvo 2005 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

  • The VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 2005 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 VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 2005, with the call on each
Question2294 (DT)Volvo 2005Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?103.7 kW (139.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”103 kW (138 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 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 Volvo 2005 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 Volvo 2005.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 2294 (DT) and the Volvo 2005.
Which pumps more oil for implements?—62.6 L/min (16.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 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, “Volvo 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, “Volvo 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 Volvo 2005.
Which has the wider choice of gears?12Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”14 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 2005”EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
Which offers a creeper range?——No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 2294 (DT) and the Volvo 2005.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 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, “Volvo 2005”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”independentTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo 2005”EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 2294”4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo 2005”AheadThe VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 2005 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?1984–19851985–1987EvenSame 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 VOLVO-BM-VALMET Volvo 2005 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 forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% 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).
  • Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
  • 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 Volvo 2005 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 and a creeper range.

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