Agco RT-135 or Renault 145-54 TX?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the RT-135 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 145-54 TX has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Agco RT-135 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 182% (74.7 L/min / 19.7 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?
| Question | RT-135 | 145-54 TX | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 99.3 kW (133.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 99.4 kW (133.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the RT-135 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 145-54 TX 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 RT-135 and the 145-54 TX. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the RT-135 and the 145-54 TX. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 115.8 L/min (30.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 41.1 L/min (10.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | AheadThe Agco RT-135 has 182% more hydraulic flow (74.7 L/min / 19.7 gpm) than the Renault 145-54 TX (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 8,850 kg (19,511 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the RT-135. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 7,042 kg (15,525 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 5,655 kg (12,467 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Agco RT-135 is 25% heavier (1,387 kg / 3,058 lb) than the Renault 145-54 TX (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | — | 8,500 kg (18,739 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the RT-135. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | Stepless (CVT)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 16 forwardTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | DifferTransmissions differ in kind: the Agco RT-135 is stepless (CVT) and the Renault 145-54 TX has 16 forward gears — not called. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the RT-135 and the 145-54 TX. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | 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, “AGCO RT 135” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 145-54 TX. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO RT 135” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 2004–2005 | 1989–1990 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Agco RT-135 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 Agco RT-135 has 182% more hydraulic flow (74.7 L/min / 19.7 gpm) than the Renault 145-54 TX (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Agco RT-135 is 25% heavier (1,387 kg / 3,058 lb) than the Renault 145-54 TX (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Agco RT-135 is newer: production began 15 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Transmissions differ in kind: the Agco RT-135 is stepless (CVT) and the Renault 145-54 TX has 16 forward gears — not called.
- 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 power at the PTO shaft: the RT-135 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 145-54 TX 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, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources