Landini 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) or Massey Ferguson MF 342 (A)?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 342 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Massey Ferguson 342 (A) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 50% (19.1 L/min / 5.0 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
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 | 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) | MF 342 (A) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 34.6 kW (46.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Landini 5860” | 34.6 kW (46.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 342” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 342 (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 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) and the MF 342 (A). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) and the MF 342 (A). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 37.9 L/min (10.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Landini 5860” | 57.0 L/min (15.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 342” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 342 (A) has 50% more hydraulic flow (19.1 L/min / 5.0 gpm) than the Landini 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 2,040 kg (4,497 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Landini 5860” | 2,145 kg (4,729 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 342” | 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? | 2,250 kg (4,960 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Landini 5860” | 2,450 kg (5,401 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 342” | 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 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) and the MF 342 (A). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 12 to 24Traktorenlexikon, “Landini 5860” | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 342” | AheadThe Landini 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) has 50% more forward gears (4 gears) than the Massey Ferguson 342 (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 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) and the MF 342 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Landini 5860” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 342” | 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, “Landini 5860” | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 342” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 342” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K). |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Landini 5860” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 342” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1988–2000 | 1993–1997 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson 342 (A) is newer: production began 5 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 342 (A) has 50% more hydraulic flow (19.1 L/min / 5.0 gpm) than the Landini 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Landini 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) has 50% more forward gears (4 gears) than the Massey Ferguson 342 (A) (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson 342 (A) is newer: production began 5 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- 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 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 5860 (DT) TL-22 N/K (TL-22 DT/K) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 342 (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