Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) or OLIVER 1265?

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.

  • 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: 38% (8.2 L/min / 2.2 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?

Buyer questions for Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) and OLIVER 1265, with the call on each
QuestionMF 139 (A)1265Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?28.7 kW (38.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”28.7 kW (38.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1265”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 MF 139 (A) and the 1265.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MF 139 (A) and the 1265.
Which pumps more oil for implements?30.0 L/min (7.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”21.8 L/min (5.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1265”AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) has 38% more hydraulic flow (8.2 L/min / 2.2 gpm) than the OLIVER 1265 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,500 kg (3,307 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 1265.
Which is heavier, for traction?1,555 kg (3,428 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”1,870 kg (4,123 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1265”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The OLIVER 1265 is 20% heavier (315 kg / 694 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 1265.
Which has the wider choice of gears?8Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”6 to 9Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1265”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?YesTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1265”No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the MF 139 (A).
Which is faster on the road?25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1265”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?540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1265”AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the OLIVER 1265 does not (as stated by the sources).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1265”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the MF 139 (A).
Which drives on both axles?2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 139/A”Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1265”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1974–19791971–1975EvenSame 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 Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) has 38% more hydraulic flow (8.2 L/min / 2.2 gpm) than the OLIVER 1265 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The OLIVER 1265 is 20% heavier (315 kg / 694 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 139 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the OLIVER 1265 does not (as stated by the sources).
  • 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 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 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.
  • 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