Case-IH MX 255 or Massey Ferguson MF 8280 A?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the MX 255 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 8280 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Massey Ferguson 8280A suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 28% (2,264 kg / 4,991 lb) more three-point lift.
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 | MX 255 | MF 8280 A | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 192.7 kW (258.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255” | 191.4 kW (256.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the MX 255 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 8280 A 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 MX 255 and the MF 8280 A. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MX 255 and the MF 8280 A. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 146.1 L/min (38.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255” | 153.6 L/min (40.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | EvenEven on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 8,137 kg (17,939 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255” | 10,401 kg (22,931 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 8280A has 28% more lift (2,264 kg / 4,991 lb) than the Case-IH MX 255 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 9,779 kg (21,559 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255” | 9,770 kg (21,539 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | 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? | 14,000 kg (30,865 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255” | 14,000 kg (30,865 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | EvenEven on maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 18 to 24Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255” | 18Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | 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? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the MX 255 and the MF 8280 A. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255” | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | 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? | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | Sources disagreeNo call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the MX 255. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH MX255”; OECD test report 2188, 2004 | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 8280” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 2002–2005 | 1999–2002 | 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 Massey Ferguson 8280A has 28% more lift (2,264 kg / 4,991 lb) than the Case-IH MX 255 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- Even on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, 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 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 PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- 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.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the MX 255 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 8280 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- No call on PTO speeds: sources disagree on the PTO speeds of the MX 255.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources