Ford 6640 (A) or Massey Ferguson MF 3065 (A)?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 6640 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 3065 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
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 | 6640 (A) | MF 3065 (A) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 62.5 kW (83.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6640” | 62.5 kW (83.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 3065” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 6640 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 3065 (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 6640 (A) and the MF 3065 (A). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 6640 (A) and the MF 3065 (A). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 37.4 L/min (9.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6640” | 49.5 L/min (13.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 3065” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 3065 (A) has 32% more hydraulic flow (12.1 L/min / 3.2 gpm) than the Ford 6640 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 3,478 kg (7,668 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6640” | 2,881 kg (6,351 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 3065” | AheadThe Ford 6640 (A) has 21% more lift (597 kg / 1,317 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 3065 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,860 kg (8,510 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6640” | 3,485 kg (7,683 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 3065” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford 6640 (A) is 11% heavier (375 kg / 827 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 3065 (A) (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 6640 (A) and the MF 3065 (A). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 12 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6640” | 32Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 3065” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 3065 (A) has 100% more forward gears (16 gears) than the Ford 6640 (A) (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 6640 (A) and the MF 3065 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6640” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 3065” | 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 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 6640” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 3065” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 3065” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 6640 (A). |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 6640” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 3065” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1991–1997 | 1988–1995 | 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 3065 (A) has 32% more hydraulic flow (12.1 L/min / 3.2 gpm) than the Ford 6640 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 6640 (A) has 21% more lift (597 kg / 1,317 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 3065 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 6640 (A) is 11% heavier (375 kg / 827 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 3065 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson 3065 (A) has 100% more forward gears (16 gears) than the Ford 6640 (A) (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- 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.
- 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 6640 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 3065 (A) 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, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources