Case-IH MX 90 C or VALMET 900?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the MX 90 C has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 900 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Case-IH MX 90C suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 59% (32.7 L/min / 8.6 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 | MX 90 C | 900 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 66.2 kW (88.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX90C” | 66.2 kW (88.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 900/II” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the MX 90 C has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 900 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 MX 90 C and the 900. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MX 90 C and the 900. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 88.4 L/min (23.4 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX90C” | 55.7 L/min (14.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 900/II” | AheadThe Case-IH MX 90C has 59% more hydraulic flow (32.7 L/min / 8.6 gpm) than the VALMET 900 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 3,365 kg (7,419 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 900/II” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the MX 90 C. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 5,080 kg (11,199 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX90C” | 3,360 kg (7,408 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 900/II” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH MX 90C is 51% heavier (1,720 kg / 3,792 lb) than the VALMET 900 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 7,815 kg (17,229 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX90C” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 900. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16 to 32Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX90C” | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 900/II” | EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the MX 90 C and the 900. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX90C” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 900/II” | 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, “Case-IH MX90C” | 540E/540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 900/II” | AheadThe Case-IH MX 90C offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the VALMET 900 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX90C” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 900. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX90C”; OECD test report 1929, 2000 | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 900/II” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1998–2000 | 1997–2002 | 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 MX 90C has 59% more hydraulic flow (32.7 L/min / 8.6 gpm) than the VALMET 900 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH MX 90C is 51% heavier (1,720 kg / 3,792 lb) than the VALMET 900 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH MX 90C offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the VALMET 900 does not (as stated by the sources).
- Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- 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 MX 90 C has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 900 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