J.I. Case 1194 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 J.I. Case 1194 is ahead on forward gears and 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: 13% (3.5 L/min / 0.9 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The J.I. Case 1194 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?
| Question | 1194 | MF 139 (A) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 28.8 kW (38.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1194” | 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 1194 and the MF 139 (A). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1194 and the MF 139 (A). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 26.5 L/min (7.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1194” | 30.0 L/min (7.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) has 13% more hydraulic flow (3.5 L/min / 0.9 gpm) than the J.I. Case 1194 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 990 kg (2,183 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1194” | 1,500 kg (3,307 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the 1194: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1194”); the MF 139 (A): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,110 kg (4,652 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1194” | 1,555 kg (3,428 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The J.I. Case 1194 is 36% heavier (555 kg / 1,224 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 1194. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1194” | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A” | AheadThe J.I. Case 1194 has 50% more forward gears (4 gears) than the Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 1194 and the MF 139 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1194” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A” | AheadThe J.I. Case 1194 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, “Case 1194” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the J.I. Case 1194 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 1194 and the MF 139 (A). |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 1194” | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the J.I. Case 1194 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1984–1985 | 1974–1979 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The J.I. Case 1194 is newer: production began 10 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 13% more hydraulic flow (3.5 L/min / 0.9 gpm) than the J.I. Case 1194 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The J.I. Case 1194 is 36% heavier (555 kg / 1,224 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The J.I. Case 1194 has 50% more forward gears (4 gears) than the Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The J.I. Case 1194 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 J.I. Case 1194 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the J.I. Case 1194 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The J.I. Case 1194 is newer: production began 10 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.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the 1194: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1194”); the MF 139 (A): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”) — 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, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources