Massey Ferguson MF 154 (A) or Massey Ferguson MF 254 S (A)?

Which should you choose?

On performance, no comparable figure differs by more than its threshold: on this data the machines are level.

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 154 (A) and Massey Ferguson MF 254 S (A), with the call on each
QuestionMF 154 (A)MF 254 S (A)Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?30.6 kW (41.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 154”30.4 kW (40.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 254 (S)”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 MF 154 (A) and the MF 254 S (A).
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MF 154 (A) and the MF 254 S (A).
Which pumps more oil for implements?27.0 L/min (7.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 154”28.0 L/min (7.4 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 254 (S)”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?1,525 kg (3,362 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 154”1,662 kg (3,664 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 254 (S)”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?2,030 kg (4,475 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 154”2,620 kg (5,776 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 254 (S)”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson MF 254 S (A) is 29% heavier (590 kg / 1,301 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 154 (A) (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 MF 154 (A) and the MF 254 S (A).
Which has the wider choice of gears?12Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 154”12Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 254 (S)”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 MF 154 (A) and the MF 254 S (A).
Which is faster on the road?25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 154”25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 254 (S)”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, “Massey Ferguson MF 154”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 254 (S)”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 154”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the MF 254 S (A).
Which drives on both axles?2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 154”2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 254 (S)”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1973–19831982–1987Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson MF 254 S (A) is newer: production began 9 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 254 S (A) is 29% heavier (590 kg / 1,301 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 154 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 254 S (A) is newer: production began 9 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • 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 hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, 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 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.
  • 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