Leyland 262 or Massey Ferguson MF 265?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Leyland 262: hydraulic flow. It is also ahead on top speed. On features, the Massey Ferguson 265 is ahead on PTO speeds and drive.
- The Massey Ferguson 265 suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 1000 rpm.
- The Leyland 262 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 18% (4.8 L/min / 1.3 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Leyland 262 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 | 262 | MF 265 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 39.0 kW (52.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 262” | 38.5 kW (51.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 265” | 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 262 and the MF 265. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 262 and the MF 265. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 31.3 L/min (8.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 262” | 26.5 L/min (7.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 265” | AheadThe Leyland 262 has 18% more hydraulic flow (4.8 L/min / 1.3 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson 265 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,876 kg (4,136 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 262” | 1,800 kg (3,968 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 265” | 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? | 3,050 kg (6,724 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 262” | 2,630 kg (5,798 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 265” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Leyland 262 is 16% heavier (420 kg / 926 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 265 (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 262 and the MF 265. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 9 to 10Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 262” | 8 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 265” | 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 262 and the MF 265. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 262” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 265” | AheadThe Leyland 262 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Massey Ferguson 265 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Leyland 262” | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 265” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 265 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Leyland 262 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Leyland 262” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 265” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Leyland 262” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 265” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 265 is available with four-wheel drive; the Leyland 262 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1975–1980 | 1975–1985 | 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 Leyland 262 has 18% more hydraulic flow (4.8 L/min / 1.3 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson 265 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Leyland 262 is 16% heavier (420 kg / 926 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 265 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Leyland 262 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Massey Ferguson 265 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson 265 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Leyland 262 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Massey Ferguson 265 is available with four-wheel drive; the Leyland 262 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 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