AGRIFULL 345-C (S) or Massey Ferguson MF 255?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 345-C (S) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 255 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The AGRIFULL 345-C (S) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 18% (3.0 L/min / 0.8 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Massey Ferguson MF 255 suits road haulage better on this data: 150% (15.0 km/h / 9.3 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 | 345-C (S) | MF 255 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 34.6 kW (46.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 345 C” | 34.6 kW (46.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 255” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 345-C (S) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 255 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft. |
| 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 345-C (S) and the MF 255. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 345-C (S) and the MF 255. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 20.0 L/min (5.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 345 C” | 17.0 L/min (4.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 255” | AheadThe AGRIFULL 345-C (S) has 18% more hydraulic flow (3.0 L/min / 0.8 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson MF 255 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 1,800 kg (3,968 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 255” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 345-C (S). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,400 kg (5,291 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 345 C” | 2,340 kg (5,159 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 255” | EvenEven on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | — | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 345-C (S) and the MF 255. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 345 C” | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 255” | 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 345-C (S) and the MF 255. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 10 km/h (6.2 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 345 C” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 255” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 255 has 150% more top speed (15.0 km/h / 9.3 mph) than the AGRIFULL 345-C (S) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 345 C” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 255” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 345 C” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 255” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | TracksTraktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 345 C” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 255” | DifferDrive differs: the AGRIFULL 345-C (S) Tracks and the Massey Ferguson MF 255 2WD — tracks and wheels are different kinds of running gear, not called. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1976–1977 | 1975–1981 | EvenSame 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 AGRIFULL 345-C (S) has 18% more hydraulic flow (3.0 L/min / 0.8 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson MF 255 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson MF 255 has 150% more top speed (15.0 km/h / 9.3 mph) than the AGRIFULL 345-C (S) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- Even on weight (both unladen weight, 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.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- Drive differs: the AGRIFULL 345-C (S) Tracks and the Massey Ferguson MF 255 2WD — tracks and wheels are different kinds of running gear, not called.
- Same era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 345-C (S) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 255 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources