Ford 8000 or SAME Buffalo DT?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Ford 8000: hydraulic flow. It is also ahead on top speed. On features, the SAME Buffalo DT is ahead on PTO speeds and drive.
- The SAME Buffalo DT suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 540 rpm.
- The Ford 8000 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 51% (15.4 L/min / 4.1 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The SAME Buffalo DT suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: four-wheel drive.
- The Ford 8000 suits road haulage better on this data: 20% (5.0 km/h / 3.1 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?
| Question | 8000 | Buffalo DT | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 70.4 kW (94.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 69.9 kW (94 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo” | 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 8000 and the Buffalo DT. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 8000 and the Buffalo DT. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 45.4 L/min (12.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 30.0 L/min (7.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo” | AheadThe Ford 8000 has 51% more hydraulic flow (15.4 L/min / 4.1 gpm) than the SAME Buffalo DT (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 3,200 kg (7,055 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 3,000 kg (6,614 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo” | EvenEven on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 4,526 kg (9,978 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 4,320 kg (9,524 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo” | 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? | — | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 8000 and the Buffalo DT. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 8 to 14Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo” | 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 8000 and the Buffalo DT. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo” | AheadThe Ford 8000 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the SAME Buffalo DT (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo” | AheadThe SAME Buffalo DT offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the Ford 8000 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo” | AheadThe SAME Buffalo DT is available with four-wheel drive; the Ford 8000 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1968–1972 | 1968–1974 | 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 Ford 8000 has 51% more hydraulic flow (15.4 L/min / 4.1 gpm) than the SAME Buffalo DT (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 8000 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the SAME Buffalo DT (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The SAME Buffalo DT offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the Ford 8000 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The SAME Buffalo DT is available with four-wheel drive; the Ford 8000 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- 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 three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, 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 forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- Same era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources