Steyr 280a or Steyr 870 (a)?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Steyr 870 (a): three-point lift. It is also ahead on drive.
- The Steyr 870 (a) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 45% (900 kg / 1,984 lb) more three-point lift.
- The Steyr 870 (a) suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: four-wheel drive.
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 | 280a | 870 (a) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 48.5 kW (65 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 280a” | 49.3 kW (66.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 870” | 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 280a and the 870 (a). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 280a and the 870 (a). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | 37.0 L/min (9.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 870” | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 280a. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 2,000 kg (4,409 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 280a” | 2,900 kg (6,393 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 870” | AheadThe Steyr 870 (a) has 45% more lift (900 kg / 1,984 lb) than the Steyr 280a (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,130 kg (6,900 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 280a” | 2,930 kg (6,460 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 870” | 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 280a and the 870 (a). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 7 to 10Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 280a” | 12 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 870” | 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? | YesTraktorenlexikon, “Steyr 280a” | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 870 (a). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 280a” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Steyr 870” | 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? | 575 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Steyr 280a” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Steyr 870” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the 280a. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | liveTraktorenlexikon, “Steyr 870” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 280a. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Steyr 280a” | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Steyr 870” | AheadThe Steyr 870 (a) is available with four-wheel drive; the Steyr 280a is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1958–1972 | 1971–1975 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Steyr 870 (a) is newer: production began 13 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Steyr 870 (a) has 45% more lift (900 kg / 1,984 lb) than the Steyr 280a (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Steyr 870 (a) is available with four-wheel drive; the Steyr 280a is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The Steyr 870 (a) is newer: production began 13 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 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 difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, 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, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range, PTO speeds and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources