John Deere 4040 (A) or Massey Ferguson MF 2645?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 4040 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 2645 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Massey Ferguson MF 2645 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 54% (2,200 kg / 4,850 lb) more 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?
| Question | 4040 (A) | MF 2645 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 81 kW (109 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 4040” | 81 kW (109 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2645” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 4040 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 2645 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 4040 (A) and the MF 2645. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 4040 (A) and the MF 2645. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 96.0 L/min (25.4 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 4040” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the MF 2645. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 4,100 kg (9,039 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 4040” | 6,300 kg (13,889 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2645” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 2645 has 54% more lift (2,200 kg / 4,850 lb) than the John Deere 4040 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 5,067 kg (11,171 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 4040” | 5,630 kg (12,412 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2645” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson MF 2645 is 11% heavier (563 kg / 1,241 lb) than the John Deere 4040 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 4040” | 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2645” | EvenEven on maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 4040” | 16Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2645” | 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? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 4040 (A) and the MF 2645. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 4040” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2645” | 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? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 4040” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2645” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2645” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 4040 (A). |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 4040” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2645” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1977–1985 | 1985–1986 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson MF 2645 is newer: production began 8 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Massey Ferguson MF 2645 has 54% more lift (2,200 kg / 4,850 lb) than the John Deere 4040 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson MF 2645 is 11% heavier (563 kg / 1,241 lb) than the John Deere 4040 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson MF 2645 is newer: production began 8 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, 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 difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
- 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, 1000 rpm).
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 4040 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 2645 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, hydraulic flow, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources