Ford 2600 or Massey Ferguson MF 350?

Which should you choose?

The figures split: the Ford 2600 is ahead on hydraulic flow; the Massey Ferguson MF 350 is ahead on 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?

Buyer questions for Ford 2600 and Massey Ferguson MF 350, with the call on each
Question2600MF 350Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?22.8 kW (30.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2600”22.9 kW (30.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 350”EvenEven on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call.
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 2600 and the MF 350.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 2600 and the MF 350.
Which pumps more oil for implements?31.4 L/min (8.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2600”19.0 L/min (5.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 350”AheadThe Ford 2600 has 65% more hydraulic flow (12.4 L/min / 3.3 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson MF 350 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,270 kg (2,800 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2600”1,850 kg (4,079 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 350”AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 350 has 46% more lift (580 kg / 1,279 lb) than the Ford 2600 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
Which is heavier, for traction?1,731 kg (3,816 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2600”2,629 kg (5,796 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 350”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson MF 350 is 52% heavier (898 kg / 1,980 lb) than the Ford 2600 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
Which may carry more ballast and load?No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 2600 and the MF 350.
Which has the wider choice of gears?8Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2600”8 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 350”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 2600 and the MF 350.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2600”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 350”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?540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 2600”540/1789 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 350”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 2600 and the MF 350.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 2600”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 350”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1975–19811987–1994Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson MF 350 is newer: production began 12 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Ford 2600 has 65% more hydraulic flow (12.4 L/min / 3.3 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson MF 350 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 350 has 46% more lift (580 kg / 1,279 lb) than the Ford 2600 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 350 is 52% heavier (898 kg / 1,980 lb) than the Ford 2600 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 350 is newer: production began 12 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • Even on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, 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 speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
  • Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
  • 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