Fahr D 540 or Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the D 540 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 65 Mark-II has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

  • The Fahr D 540 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 23% (3.4 L/min / 0.9 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
  • The Fahr D 540 suits road haulage better on this data: 60% (12.0 km/h / 7.5 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?

Buyer questions for Fahr D 540 and Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II, with the call on each
QuestionD 540MF 65 Mark-IICall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?43.9 kW (58.9 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 540”42.7 kW (57.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark II”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the D 540 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 65 Mark-II 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 D 540 and the MF 65 Mark-II.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the D 540 and the MF 65 Mark-II.
Which pumps more oil for implements?18.5 L/min (4.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 540”15.1 L/min (4.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark II”AheadThe Fahr D 540 has 23% more hydraulic flow (3.4 L/min / 0.9 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,134 kg (2,500 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark II”No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the D 540.
Which is heavier, for traction?3,330 kg (7,341 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 540”2,075 kg (4,575 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark II”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Fahr D 540 is 60% heavier (1,255 kg / 2,767 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
Which may carry more ballast and load?4,100 kg (9,039 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 540”No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the MF 65 Mark-II.
Which has the wider choice of gears?5 to 7Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 540”6Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark II”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 D 540 and the MF 65 Mark-II.
Which is faster on the road?32 km/h (19.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 540”20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark II”AheadThe Fahr D 540 has 60% more top speed (12.0 km/h / 7.5 mph) than the Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
Which offers more PTO speeds?540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 540”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark II”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?dependent (stops with the clutch)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 540”independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark II”AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II has an independent PTO; the Fahr D 540’s is dependent (stops with the clutch).
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 540”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark II”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1955–19581961–1964Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Fahr D 540 has 23% more hydraulic flow (3.4 L/min / 0.9 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The Fahr D 540 is 60% heavier (1,255 kg / 2,767 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Fahr D 540 has 60% more top speed (12.0 km/h / 7.5 mph) than the Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II has an independent PTO; the Fahr D 540’s is dependent (stops with the clutch).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 65 Mark-II is newer: production began 6 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
  • Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
  • Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
  • Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the D 540 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 65 Mark-II 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