Ford TW-20 (A) or Renault 1451-4?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the TW-20 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1451-4 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
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 | TW-20 (A) | 1451-4 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 107.4 kW (144.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 106.7 kW (143.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TW-20 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1451-4 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 TW-20 (A) and the 1451-4. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the TW-20 (A) and the 1451-4. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 60.6 L/min (16.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 38.0 L/min (10.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | AheadThe Ford TW-20 (A) has 59% more hydraulic flow (22.6 L/min / 6.0 gpm) than the Renault 1451-4 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 3,680 kg (8,113 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 4,620 kg (10,185 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | AheadThe Renault 1451-4 has 26% more lift (940 kg / 2,072 lb) than the Ford TW-20 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 5,828 kg (12,849 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 5,970 kg (13,162 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | 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? | 8,165 kg (18,001 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 1451-4. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 14 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 15 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | 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? | — | YesTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the TW-20 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | 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 TW 20” | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | AheadThe Ford TW-20 (A) offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the Renault 1451-4 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 1451-4 R7694” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1979–1983 | 1974–1980 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford TW-20 (A) is newer: production began 5 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Ford TW-20 (A) has 59% more hydraulic flow (22.6 L/min / 6.0 gpm) than the Renault 1451-4 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Renault 1451-4 has 26% more lift (940 kg / 2,072 lb) than the Ford TW-20 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Ford TW-20 (A) offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the Renault 1451-4 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Ford TW-20 (A) is newer: production began 5 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- 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 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 independence: every PTO is independent.
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TW-20 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1451-4 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, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources