Agco RT-140 A or URSUS 1734?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the RT-140 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1734 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-140 A | 1734 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 122.8 kW (164.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 140 A” | 125 kW (168 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the RT-140 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1734 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-140 A and the 1734. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the RT-140 A and the 1734. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 115.6 L/min (30.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 140 A” | 58.0 L/min (15.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | AheadThe Agco RT-140 A has 99% more hydraulic flow (57.6 L/min / 15.2 gpm) than the URSUS 1734 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 6,312 kg (13,916 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 140 A” | 6,966 kg (15,357 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | AheadThe URSUS 1734 has 10% more lift (654 kg / 1,442 lb) than the Agco RT-140 A (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 7,395 kg (16,303 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 140 A” | 5,590 kg (12,324 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Agco RT-140 A is 32% heavier (1,805 kg / 3,979 lb) than the URSUS 1734 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | — | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the RT-140 A and the 1734. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | Stepless (CVT)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 140 A” | 12 to 16 forwardTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | DifferTransmissions differ in kind: the Agco RT-140 A is stepless (CVT) and the URSUS 1734 has 12 to 16 forward gears — not called. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the RT-140 A and the 1734. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 140 A” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | 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 140 A” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 140 A” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 140 A” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ursus 1734” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 2006–2011 | 1998–2004 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Agco RT-140 A is newer: production began 8 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-140 A has 99% more hydraulic flow (57.6 L/min / 15.2 gpm) than the URSUS 1734 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The URSUS 1734 has 10% more lift (654 kg / 1,442 lb) than the Agco RT-140 A (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Agco RT-140 A is 32% heavier (1,805 kg / 3,979 lb) than the URSUS 1734 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Agco RT-140 A is newer: production began 8 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Transmissions differ in kind: the Agco RT-140 A is stepless (CVT) and the URSUS 1734 has 12 to 16 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-140 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1734 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, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources