Agco DT-240 A or Case-IH MX 285?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the DT-240 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MX 285 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Case-IH MX 285 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 16% (22.9 L/min / 6.0 gpm) more hydraulic flow and 36% (2,370 kg / 5,225 lb) more three-point lift.
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?
| Question | DT-240 A | MX 285 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 213.3 kW (286.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO DT 240 A” | 211.1 kW (283.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the DT-240 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MX 285 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 DT-240 A and the MX 285. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the DT-240 A and the MX 285. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 139.8 L/min (36.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO DT 240 A” | 162.7 L/min (43.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285” | AheadThe Case-IH MX 285 has 16% more hydraulic flow (22.9 L/min / 6.0 gpm) than the Agco DT-240A (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 6,644 kg (14,648 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO DT 240 A” | 9,014 kg (19,872 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285” | AheadThe Case-IH MX 285 has 36% more lift (2,370 kg / 5,225 lb) than the Agco DT-240A (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 9,240 kg (20,371 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO DT 240 A” | 11,090 kg (24,449 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH MX 285 is 20% heavier (1,850 kg / 4,079 lb) than the Agco DT-240A (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 14,000 kg (30,865 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO DT 240 A” | 14,000 kg (30,865 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285” | EvenEven on maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | Stepless (CVT)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO DT 240 A” | 18 to 24 forwardTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285” | DifferTransmissions differ in kind: the Agco DT-240A is stepless (CVT) and the Case-IH MX 285 has 18 to 24 forward gears — not called. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the DT-240 A and the MX 285. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO DT 240 A” | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285” | 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? | 540/1000/540E rpmTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO DT 240 A” | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285” | Sources disagreeNo call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the MX 285. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the DT-240 A. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO DT 240 A” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX285”; OECD test report 2190, 2004 | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 2005–2008 | 2002–2005 | EvenSame 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 Case-IH MX 285 has 16% more hydraulic flow (22.9 L/min / 6.0 gpm) than the Agco DT-240A (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH MX 285 has 36% more lift (2,370 kg / 5,225 lb) than the Agco DT-240A (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH MX 285 is 20% heavier (1,850 kg / 4,079 lb) than the Agco DT-240A (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- Even on maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Transmissions differ in kind: the Agco DT-240A is stepless (CVT) and the Case-IH MX 285 has 18 to 24 forward gears — not called.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- 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 DT-240 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MX 285 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- No call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the MX 285.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources