Massey Ferguson MF 290 or OLIVER 1650 (4WD)?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the OLIVER 1650 (4WD): hydraulic flow. On features, the Massey Ferguson 290 is ahead on top speed and drive.
- The OLIVER 1650 (4WD) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 154% (27.6 L/min / 7.3 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Massey Ferguson 290 suits road haulage better on this data: 36% (8.0 km/h / 5.0 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 | MF 290 | 1650 (4WD) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 48.3 kW (64.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 290” | 48.5 kW (65.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1650” | 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 290 and the 1650 (4WD). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MF 290 and the 1650 (4WD). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 17.9 L/min (4.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 290” | 45.5 L/min (12.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1650” | AheadThe OLIVER 1650 (4WD) has 154% more hydraulic flow (27.6 L/min / 7.3 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson 290 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 2,290 kg (5,049 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 290” | — | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 1650 (4WD). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,905 kg (6,404 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 290” | 3,545 kg (7,815 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1650” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The OLIVER 1650 (4WD) is 22% heavier (640 kg / 1,411 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 290 (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 290 and the 1650 (4WD). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 290” | 6 to 18Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1650” | 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 290 and the 1650 (4WD). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 290” | 22 km/h (13.7 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1650” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 290 has 36% more top speed (8.0 km/h / 5.0 mph) than the OLIVER 1650 (4WD) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 290” | 550 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1650” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the 1650 (4WD). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the MF 290 and the 1650 (4WD). |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 290” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1650” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 290 is available with four-wheel drive; the OLIVER 1650 (4WD) is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1979–1987 | 1964–1969 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson 290 is newer: production began 15 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The OLIVER 1650 (4WD) has 154% more hydraulic flow (27.6 L/min / 7.3 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson 290 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The OLIVER 1650 (4WD) is 22% heavier (640 kg / 1,411 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 290 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson 290 has 36% more top speed (8.0 km/h / 5.0 mph) than the OLIVER 1650 (4WD) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson 290 is available with four-wheel drive; the OLIVER 1650 (4WD) is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The Massey Ferguson 290 is newer: production began 15 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 forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range, PTO speeds and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources