Case-IH CS 130 or Fendt Farmer 312?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the CS 130 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Farmer 312 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Case-IH CS 130 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 67% (49.8 L/min / 13.2 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Case-IH CS 130 suits road haulage better on this data: 13% (1,000 kg / 2,205 lb) more maximum permissible mass.
Generated by rule set compare@4 from the figures on the side-by-side table, allowed by route “similar machines”. 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 | CS 130 | Farmer 312 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 91.9 kW (123.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | 92 kW (123 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the CS 130 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Farmer 312 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 CS 130 and the Farmer 312. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the CS 130 and the Farmer 312. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 123.8 L/min (32.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | 74.0 L/min (19.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312 LSA” | AheadThe Case-IH CS 130 has 67% more hydraulic flow (49.8 L/min / 13.2 gpm) than the Fendt Farmer 312 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 8,830 kg (19,467 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | 5,800 kg (12,787 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312 LSA” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the CS 130: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130”); the Farmer 312: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312 LSA”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 6,205 kg (13,680 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | 5,350 kg (11,795 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CS 130 is 16% heavier (855 kg / 1,885 lb) than the Fendt Farmer 312 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 9,000 kg (19,842 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | 8,000 kg (17,637 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312 LSA” | AheadThe Case-IH CS 130 has 13% higher maximum permissible mass (1,000 kg / 2,205 lb) than the Fendt Farmer 312 (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 24 to 40Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | — | No figureNo call on forward gears: no figure on record for the Farmer 312. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the CS 130 and the Farmer 312. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312” | EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/540E/1000E/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | 540/750/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312 LSA” | AheadThe Fendt Farmer 312 offers 750 rpm at the PTO, which the Case-IH CS 130 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the Farmer 312. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312”; Traktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312 LSA” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1997–2003 | 1993–2001 | 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 CS 130 has 67% more hydraulic flow (49.8 L/min / 13.2 gpm) than the Fendt Farmer 312 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CS 130 is 16% heavier (855 kg / 1,885 lb) than the Fendt Farmer 312 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CS 130 has 13% higher maximum permissible mass (1,000 kg / 2,205 lb) than the Fendt Farmer 312 (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source).
- The Fendt Farmer 312 offers 750 rpm at the PTO, which the Case-IH CS 130 does not (as stated by the sources).
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- 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 CS 130 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Farmer 312 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the CS 130: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS130”); the Farmer 312: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Fendt Farmer 312 LSA”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, forward gears, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources