Massey Ferguson MF 4255 (A) or Massey Ferguson MF 6255 (A)?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the MF 4255 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 6255 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Massey Ferguson 6255 (A) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 47% (30.7 L/min / 8.1 gpm) more hydraulic flow and 18% (650 kg / 1,433 lb) more three-point lift.
- The Massey Ferguson 6255 (A) suits road haulage better on this data: 26% (1,800 kg / 3,968 lb) more maximum permissible mass.
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 | MF 4255 (A) | MF 6255 (A) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 69.9 kW (93.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | 69.9 kW (93.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the MF 4255 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 6255 (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 MF 4255 (A) and the MF 6255 (A). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MF 4255 (A) and the MF 6255 (A). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 65.0 L/min (17.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | 95.7 L/min (25.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 6255 (A) has 47% more hydraulic flow (30.7 L/min / 8.1 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson 4255 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 3,600 kg (7,937 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | 4,250 kg (9,370 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 6255 (A) has 18% more lift (650 kg / 1,433 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 4255 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,690 kg (8,135 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | 4,195 kg (9,248 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson 6255 (A) is 14% heavier (505 kg / 1,113 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 4255 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 7,000 kg (15,432 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | 8,800 kg (19,401 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 6255 (A) has 26% higher maximum permissible mass (1,800 kg / 3,968 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 4255 (A) (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 12 to 24Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | 16 to 32Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | 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 MF 4255 (A) and the MF 6255 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | 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? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | 540/1000/540E/1000E rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 4255” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6255” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1997–2001 | 1999–2003 | 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 6255 (A) has 47% more hydraulic flow (30.7 L/min / 8.1 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson 4255 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson 6255 (A) has 18% more lift (650 kg / 1,433 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 4255 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson 6255 (A) is 14% heavier (505 kg / 1,113 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 4255 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson 6255 (A) has 26% higher maximum permissible mass (1,800 kg / 3,968 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 4255 (A) (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source).
- Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- 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 PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- 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 MF 4255 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 6255 (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 and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources