Agco RT-135 or Hürlimann SX 1350?
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 SX 1350 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
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 | SX 1350 | 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, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | 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 SX 1350 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 SX 1350. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the RT-135 and the SX 1350. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 115.8 L/min (30.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 109.0 L/min (28.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | EvenEven on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 7,000 kg (15,432 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | 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” | 6,700 kg (14,771 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | 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? | — | 10,500 kg (23,149 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | 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” | 18 to 27 forwardTraktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | DifferTransmissions differ in kind: the Agco RT-135 is stepless (CVT) and the Hürlimann SX 1350 has 18 to 27 forward gears — not called. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the RT-135 and the SX 1350. |
| 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)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | 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” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann SX 1350” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 2004–2005 | 1998–2004 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Agco RT-135 is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Agco RT-135 is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, 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.
- Transmissions differ in kind: the Agco RT-135 is stepless (CVT) and the Hürlimann SX 1350 has 18 to 27 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 PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- 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 SX 1350 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 and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources