Massey Ferguson MF 2625 or Massey Ferguson MF 699?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the MF 2625 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 699 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 2625 and Massey Ferguson MF 699, with the call on each
QuestionMF 2625MF 699Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?69.9 kW (93.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2625”70 kW (94 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 699”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the MF 2625 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 699 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 2625 and the MF 699.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MF 2625 and the MF 699.
Which pumps more oil for implements?63.5 L/min (16.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 699”No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the MF 2625.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?5,480 kg (12,081 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2625”No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the MF 699.
Which is heavier, for traction?5,450 kg (12,015 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2625”4,075 kg (8,984 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 699”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson MF 2625 is 34% heavier (1,375 kg / 3,031 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 699 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
Which may carry more ballast and load?7,500 kg (16,535 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2625”No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the MF 699.
Which has the wider choice of gears?16Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2625”12Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 699”AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 2625 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the Massey Ferguson MF 699 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
Which offers a creeper range?No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the MF 2625 and the MF 699.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2625”32 km/h (19.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 699”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 2625”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 699”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2625”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the MF 699.
Which drives on both axles?Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 2625”4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 699”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1985–19861984–1986EvenSame 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 MF 2625 is 34% heavier (1,375 kg / 3,031 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 699 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 2625 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the Massey Ferguson MF 699 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
  • 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.
  • 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 2625 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MF 699 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, hydraulic flow, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.

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