Massey Ferguson MF 6495 A or Massey Ferguson MF 6497 A?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the MF 6495 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 6497 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

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?

Buyer questions for Massey Ferguson MF 6495 A and Massey Ferguson MF 6497 A, with the call on each
QuestionMF 6495 AMF 6497 ACall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?136.2 kW (182.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6495”136.2 kW (182.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6497”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the MF 6495 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 6497 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 6495 A and the MF 6497 A.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MF 6495 A and the MF 6497 A.
Which pumps more oil for implements?110.0 L/min (29.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6495”110.0 L/min (29.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6497”EvenEven on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?—9,279 kg (20,458 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6497”No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the MF 6495 A.
Which is heavier, for traction?6,300 kg (13,889 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6495”6,835 kg (15,069 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6497”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 MF 6495 A and the MF 6497 A.
Which has the wider choice of gears?24 to 32Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6495”24 to 32Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6497”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 6495 A and the MF 6497 A.
Which is faster on the road?40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6495”40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6497”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 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6495”540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6497”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6495”independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6497”EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
Which drives on both axles?Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6495”Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 6497”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?2003–20112004–2011EvenSame 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?

  • Even on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, 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 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 6495 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 6497 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, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.

← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources