IMT 549 (DV-E) or Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A)?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Massey Ferguson 139 (A): hydraulic flow. It is also ahead on PTO speeds and drive. On features, the IMT 549 (DV-E) is ahead on top speed.

  • The Massey Ferguson 139 (A) suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 1000 rpm.
  • The Massey Ferguson 139 (A) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 92% (14.4 L/min / 3.8 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
  • The IMT 549 (DV-E) suits road haulage better on this data: 20% (5.0 km/h / 3.1 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?

Buyer questions for IMT 549 (DV-E) and Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A), with the call on each
Question549 (DV-E)MF 139 (A)Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?28.8 kW (38.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”28.7 kW (38.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”EvenEven on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call.
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 549 (DV-E) and the MF 139 (A).
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 549 (DV-E) and the MF 139 (A).
Which pumps more oil for implements?15.6 L/min (4.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”30.0 L/min (7.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”AheadThe Massey Ferguson 139 (A) has 92% more hydraulic flow (14.4 L/min / 3.8 gpm) than the IMT 549 (DV-E) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,417 kg (3,124 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”1,500 kg (3,307 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”EvenEven on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which is heavier, for traction?2,090 kg (4,608 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”1,555 kg (3,428 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The IMT 549 (DV-E) is 34% heavier (535 kg / 1,179 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 139 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
Which may carry more ballast and load?—2,500 kg (5,512 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 549 (DV-E).
Which has the wider choice of gears?10Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”8Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
Which offers a creeper range?——No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 549 (DV-E) and the MF 139 (A).
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”AheadThe IMT 549 (DV-E) has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Massey Ferguson 139 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
Which offers more PTO speeds?540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”AheadThe Massey Ferguson 139 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the IMT 549 (DV-E) does not (as stated by the sources).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?——No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 549 (DV-E) and the MF 139 (A).
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 549”Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”AheadThe Massey Ferguson 139 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the IMT 549 (DV-E) is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
Which is newer, and what about parts?1986–19961974–1979Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The IMT 549 (DV-E) is newer: production began 12 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Massey Ferguson 139 (A) has 92% more hydraulic flow (14.4 L/min / 3.8 gpm) than the IMT 549 (DV-E) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The IMT 549 (DV-E) is 34% heavier (535 kg / 1,179 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 139 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The IMT 549 (DV-E) has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Massey Ferguson 139 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • The Massey Ferguson 139 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the IMT 549 (DV-E) does not (as stated by the sources).
  • The Massey Ferguson 139 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the IMT 549 (DV-E) is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
  • The IMT 549 (DV-E) is newer: production began 12 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • Even on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call.
  • Even on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
  • No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.

← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources