Case-IH CVX-130 or Massey Ferguson MF 2685?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the CVX-130 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 2685 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Case-IH CVX-130 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 18% (1,280 kg / 2,822 lb) more three-point lift.
- The Case-IH CVX-130 suits road haulage better on this data: 40% (3,000 kg / 6,614 lb) more maximum permissible mass and 33% (10.0 km/h / 6.2 mph) more top speed.
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 | CVX-130 | MF 2685 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 95.7 kW (128.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CVX130” | 95.7 kW (128.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2685” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the CVX-130 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 2685 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 CVX-130 and the MF 2685. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the CVX-130 and the MF 2685. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 121.5 L/min (32.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CVX130” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the MF 2685. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 8,500 kg (18,739 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CVX130” | 7,220 kg (15,917 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2685” | AheadThe Case-IH CVX-130 has 18% more lift (1,280 kg / 2,822 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 2685 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 6,270 kg (13,823 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CVX130” | 5,870 kg (12,941 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2685” | 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, “Case-IH CVX130” | 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2685” | AheadThe Case-IH CVX-130 has 40% higher maximum permissible mass (3,000 kg / 6,614 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 2685 (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | Stepless (CVT)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CVX130” | 16 forwardTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2685” | DifferTransmissions differ in kind: the Case-IH CVX-130 is stepless (CVT) and the Massey Ferguson 2685 has 16 forward gears — not called. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the CVX-130 and the MF 2685. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CVX130” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2685” | AheadThe Case-IH CVX-130 has 33% more top speed (10.0 km/h / 6.2 mph) than the Massey Ferguson 2685 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CVX130” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2685” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CVX130” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2685” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CVX130” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2685” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 2000–2003 | 1985–1987 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CVX-130 is newer: production began 15 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Case-IH CVX-130 has 18% more lift (1,280 kg / 2,822 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 2685 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CVX-130 has 40% higher maximum permissible mass (3,000 kg / 6,614 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 2685 (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CVX-130 has 33% more top speed (10.0 km/h / 6.2 mph) than the Massey Ferguson 2685 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CVX-130 is newer: production began 15 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- 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 Case-IH CVX-130 is stepless (CVT) and the Massey Ferguson 2685 has 16 forward gears — not called.
- 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 CVX-130 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 2685 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, hydraulic flow and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources