Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320 or ZETOR 8641?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the Agroplus 320 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 8641 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

  • The ZETOR 8641 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 39% (16.0 L/min / 4.2 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 Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320 and ZETOR 8641, with the call on each
QuestionAgroplus 3208641Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?60 kW (80 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”59.6 kW (79.9 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Agroplus 320 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 8641 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 Agroplus 320 and the 8641.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the Agroplus 320 and the 8641.
Which pumps more oil for implements?41 L/min (10.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”57.0 L/min (15.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”AheadThe ZETOR 8641 has 39% more hydraulic flow (16.0 L/min / 4.2 gpm) than the Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?3,000 kg (6,614 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”5,650 kg (12,456 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the Agroplus 320: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”); the 8641: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
Which is heavier, for traction?3,410 kg (7,518 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”4,390 kg (9,678 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The ZETOR 8641 is 29% heavier (980 kg / 2,161 lb) than the Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
Which may carry more ballast and load?—6,700 kg (14,771 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the Agroplus 320.
Which has the wider choice of gears?30Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”24Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”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?YesTraktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”—No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 8641.
Which is faster on the road?40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
Which offers more PTO speeds?540/540E/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?—independentTraktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the Agroplus 320.
Which drives on both axles?4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?2009–1999–2002Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320 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 ZETOR 8641 has 39% more hydraulic flow (16.0 L/min / 4.2 gpm) than the Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The ZETOR 8641 is 29% heavier (980 kg / 2,161 lb) than the Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320 is newer: production began 10 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • 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 top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
  • Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
  • Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
  • Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Agroplus 320 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 8641 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
  • Not comparable on three-point lift: the Agroplus 320: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Deutz-Fahr Agroplus 320”); the 8641: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Zetor 8641 (1999-2002)”) — 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