But the question was not about the relative merits of the optical physics of the types but an overall performance of the completed 'system' of Maksutov Cassegrain or apochromatic refractor, the subjective view looking through the system. This is why I said to argue numbers here is silly, no disrespect to Snell, Abbe, Fermat or anyone referring to them.
If the OP, as he states, knows the theory, his probable objective is to try to find out how much the theoretical advantage of an apo actually shows in the field use. But there's no need to argue numbers - they are as they are. And it is not silly to turn back to them whenever there is a disagreement in personal accounts - just because they provide the only objective measure.
Btw. the "theory" does include tracking down and quantifying fabrication, misalignment, thermally induced and other errors, effects of seeing and eyepiece/objective combined output. Each and every of those (and some others) is potentially important for the proper interpretation - and presentation - of a personal experience (view) through any given telescope.
This is not to say that every attempt at using numbers is necessarily a success. But it is not them to blame.