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 MF 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 MF 139 (A) suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 1000 rpm.
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 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 MF 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 MF 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 MF 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 MF 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”2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 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 MF 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 MF 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 MF 139 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the IMT 549 (DV-E) does not (as stated by the sources).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 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