Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 or SAME Buffalo DT?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100: hydraulic flow.

  • The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 48% (14.3 L/min / 3.8 gpm) more hydraulic flow.

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 Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 and SAME Buffalo DT, with the call on each
QuestionMB trac 1100Buffalo DTCall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?71.3 kW (95.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”69.9 kW (94 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”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 MB trac 1100 and the Buffalo DT.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MB trac 1100 and the Buffalo DT.
Which pumps more oil for implements?44.3 L/min (11.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”30.0 L/min (7.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”AheadThe Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 has 48% more hydraulic flow (14.3 L/min / 3.8 gpm) than the SAME Buffalo DT (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?4,500 kg (9,921 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”3,000 kg (6,614 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the MB trac 1100: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”); the Buffalo DT: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
Which is heavier, for traction?5,540 kg (12,214 lb) to 6,000 kg (13,228 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”4,320 kg (9,524 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 is 28% heavier (1,220 kg / 2,690 lb) than the SAME Buffalo DT (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 MB trac 1100 and the Buffalo DT.
Which has the wider choice of gears?14Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”8 to 14Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”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 MB trac 1100 and the Buffalo DT.
Which is faster on the road?25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”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, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the MB trac 1100.
Which drives on both axles?4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”4WDTraktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1976–19861968–1974Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 is newer: production began 8 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 has 48% more hydraulic flow (14.3 L/min / 3.8 gpm) than the SAME Buffalo DT (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 is 28% heavier (1,220 kg / 2,690 lb) than the SAME Buffalo DT (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 is newer: production began 8 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.
  • 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 drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
  • Not comparable on three-point lift: the MB trac 1100: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100”); the Buffalo DT: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Buffalo”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
  • 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