VS

Home > Farm Tractors > Challenger MT565

Challenger MT565

Details Rankings Comparisons Related
Challenger MT565
Compare with other Farm Tractors
 Compare
Challenger MT565 VS
All other Farm Tractors
Production
Model Year 2002  
Production Manufacturer
AGCO  (equals average)
vs 5.8% Farm Tractors have AGCO
Factory Beauvais, France 
Power Take-off (PTO)
Rear RPMs
540  (68.25 lower than average)
vs
608.25

Mechanical
Mechanical Steering Hydrostatic Power  vs 81.1% Farm Tractors have hydrostatic power
Chassis 4x2 2wd4x4 Mfwd 4wd Optional  vs 21.2% Farm Tractors have 4x2 2WD4x4 MFWD 4WD optional
Brakes Wet Disc  vs 40.8% Farm Tractors have wet disc
Engine
Engine Fuel Diesel  vs 87.6% Farm Tractors have diesel
Engine Type Sisu Vertical  vs 0.4% Farm Tractors have SISU vertical
Engine Aspiration Turbocharged  vs 36% Farm Tractors have turbocharged
Engine Cylinders
(1.54 higher than average)
vs
4.46

Engine Bore/Stroke 4.251x4.724 Inches [108 X 120 Mm] 
Engine Displacement
402 ci (95.9 ci higher than average)
vs
306.10 ci

Engine Cooling Liquid  vs 86% Farm Tractors have Liquid
Engine Compression 16.5:1  
Engine Rated RPMs
2200  (2198 higher than average)
vs
2,340

Engine Starter volts
12  (0.58 lower than average)
vs
12.58

Engine Air cleaner Dual Paper Elements 
Transmission
Transmission Clutch Wet Disc 
Transmission Type Full Power Shift  vs 15.4% Farm Tractors have full power shift
Transmission Gears
18 forward (2.87 forward higher than average)
vs
15.13 forward

Transmission Speeds   
Dimensions
Wheelbase
117.5 inches (23.17 inches higher than average)
vs
94.33 inches

Weight (operating) 15, 390 Lbs [6980 Kg] (2wd)16, 465 Lbs [7468 Kg] (4wd) 
Hydraulics
Hydraulics Type Closed Center Pressure-flow Compensated (pfc) 
Pressure
2900 psi (2898 psi higher than average)
vs
2,737 psi

Total flow
29  (4.35 higher than average)
vs
24.65

Transmission-2
Transmission-2 Type Partial Power Shift 
Transmission-2 Transmission Autopower Iv 
Transmission-2 Gears
32 forward (11.85 forward higher than average)
vs
20.15 forward

3-Point Hitch
Rear Type
III  (36.36 lower than average)
vs 4.7% Farm Tractors have III
Power
PTO (claimed)
145 hp (32.32 hp higher than average)
vs
112.68 hp

PTO (tested)
155.2 hp (22.05 hp lower than average)
vs
177.25 hp

Drawbar (tested)
141.1 hp (22.85 hp lower than average)
vs
163.95 hp

Tires
Ag front
14L-16 (2WD)16.9R30 (4WD)  (10.1 lower than average)
vs 0.1% Farm Tractors have 14L-16 (2WD)16.9R30 (4WD)
Ag rear
20.8R42  (3.99 lower than average)
vs 3.4% Farm Tractors have 20.8R42


Scroll To Top

saved