Agco RT-135 or Case-IH MXU 135 Maxxum?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the RT-135 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MXU 135 Maxxum has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Agco RT-135 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 27% (24.3 L/min / 6.4 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
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 | RT-135 | MXU 135 Maxxum | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 99.3 kW (133.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 99.3 kW (133.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MXU135” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the RT-135 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MXU 135 Maxxum 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 RT-135 and the MXU 135 Maxxum. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the RT-135 and the MXU 135 Maxxum. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 115.8 L/min (30.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 91.5 L/min (24.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MXU135” | AheadThe Agco RT-135 has 27% more hydraulic flow (24.3 L/min / 6.4 gpm) than the Case-IH MXU 135 Maxxum (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 5,996 kg (13,219 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MXU135” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the RT-135. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 7,042 kg (15,525 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 5,452 kg (12,020 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MXU135” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Agco RT-135 is 29% heavier (1,590 kg / 3,505 lb) than the Case-IH MXU 135 Maxxum (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | — | 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MXU135” | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the RT-135. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | Stepless (CVT)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 16 to 24 forwardTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MXU135” | DifferTransmissions differ in kind: the Agco RT-135 is stepless (CVT) and the Case-IH MXU 135 Maxxum has 16 to 24 forward gears — not called. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the RT-135 and the MXU 135 Maxxum. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MXU135” | 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 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 540E/540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MXU135” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the MXU 135 Maxxum. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MXU135” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 2004–2005 | 2003–2006 | 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 Agco RT-135 has 27% more hydraulic flow (24.3 L/min / 6.4 gpm) than the Case-IH MXU 135 Maxxum (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Agco RT-135 is 29% heavier (1,590 kg / 3,505 lb) than the Case-IH MXU 135 Maxxum (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- Transmissions differ in kind: the Agco RT-135 is stepless (CVT) and the Case-IH MXU 135 Maxxum has 16 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 PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
- 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 RT-135 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MXU 135 Maxxum 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, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources