Ford 6710 or Renault 95-14 TX?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Ford 6710: hydraulic flow. It is also ahead on forward gears.

  • The Ford 6710 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 62% (26.3 L/min / 6.9 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 Ford 6710 and Renault 95-14 TX, with the call on each
Question671095-14 TXCall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?50.9 kW (68.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6710”50.8 kW (68.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 95-14 TX/TX R7812”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 6710 and the 95-14 TX.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 6710 and the 95-14 TX.
Which pumps more oil for implements?68.9 L/min (18.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6710”42.6 L/min (11.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 95-14 TX/TX R7812”AheadThe Ford 6710 has 62% more hydraulic flow (26.3 L/min / 6.9 gpm) than the Renault 95-14 TX (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?4,255 kg (9,381 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6710”4,100 kg (9,039 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 95-14 TX/TX R7812”EvenEven on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which is heavier, for traction?3,164 kg (6,975 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6710”4,615 kg (10,174 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 95-14 TX/TX R7812”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 95-14 TX is 46% heavier (1,451 kg / 3,199 lb) than the Ford 6710 (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 6710 and the 95-14 TX.
Which has the wider choice of gears?16Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6710”12Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 95-14 TX/TX R7812”AheadThe Ford 6710 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the Renault 95-14 TX (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
Which offers a creeper range?No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 6710 and the 95-14 TX.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 6710”25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 95-14 TX/TX R7812”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, “Ford 6710”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 95-14 TX/TX R7812”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 6710”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 95-14 TX.
Which drives on both axles?2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 6710”4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 95-14 TX/TX R7812”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1981–19891982–1986EvenSame era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Ford 6710 has 62% more hydraulic flow (26.3 L/min / 6.9 gpm) than the Renault 95-14 TX (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The Renault 95-14 TX is 46% heavier (1,451 kg / 3,199 lb) than the Ford 6710 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Ford 6710 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the Renault 95-14 TX (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
  • 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 three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% 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.
  • Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
  • Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
  • Same era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • 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