Head to head · Utility

Ebro 160D vs Minneapolis-Moline ZTS

Ebro 160D Tractor
EbroModel A

Ebro 160D

Utility

power
Not recorded
displacement
220 ci
Cylinders
4
Forward gears
Not recorded
Full 160D specs
Minneapolis-Moline ZTS Tractor
Minneapolis-MolineModel B

Minneapolis-Moline ZTS

Utility

power
Not recorded
displacement
186 ci
Cylinders
4
Forward gears
5
Full ZTS specs
EbroEbro 160D
vs
Minneapolis-MolineMinneapolis-Moline ZTS

How they compare

Headline specs vs. the whole Utility

n = 5,580–5,720

Engine Displacement

▲ 160D higher · +34 ci (+18%)
160D220 ci
ZTS186 ci
Median Utility Tractor183 ci

160D is in the 60th percentile; ZTS is in the 50th · 5,580 models

Cylinders

= Effectively tied
160D4
ZTS4
Median Utility Tractor4

160D is in the 50th percentile; ZTS is in the 50th · 5,720 models

160D (A)ZTS (B)Median Utility Tractor

Full comparison

Every spec, side by side

General Information

SpecEbro 160DMinneapolis-Moline ZTSDifference
ManufacturerEbroMinneapolis-Moline—
Model160DZTS—
CategoryUtilityUtility, Standard Tread—

Engine

SpecEbro 160DMinneapolis-Moline ZTSDifference
ManufacturerPerkinsMinneapolis-Moline—
ModelNot recordedRE—
Rated RPMNot recorded1,500RPM—
Cylinders44Same
Displacement220ci186ci▲ 160D+34 ci · +18%
BoreNot recorded3.6in—
StrokeNot recorded4.5in—

Transmission

SpecEbro 160DMinneapolis-Moline ZTSDifference
TypeNot recordedUnsynchronized gear—

Hydraulics

SpecEbro 160DMinneapolis-Moline ZTSDifference
Steering TypeNot recordedManual—

Chassis & Drive

SpecEbro 160DMinneapolis-Moline ZTSDifference
Chassis Type4x24x2 2WD—
Drive Type2WD2WDSame
Steering TypeNot recordedManual—

Category context

Both models against the field

Engine Displacement

median 183 ci
A · 60th percentile (220 ci)B · 50th percentile (186 ci)

Cylinders

median 4
A · 50th percentile (4)B · 50th percentile (4)
A · 160DB · ZTSMedian Utility Tractor
Full spec pageEbro 160DFull spec pageMinneapolis-Moline ZTS