Hanomag R 35/45 or Volvo T-31?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the R 35/45 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the T-31 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Volvo T-31 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 49% (7.8 L/min / 2.1 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Volvo T-31 suits road haulage better on this data: 56% (10.8 km/h / 6.7 mph) more top speed.
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 | R 35/45 | T-31 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 25.6 kW (34.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | 25 kW (34 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 31” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the R 35/45 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the T-31 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 R 35/45 and the T-31. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the R 35/45 and the T-31. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 16.0 L/min (4.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | 23.8 L/min (6.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 31” | AheadThe Volvo T-31 has 49% more hydraulic flow (7.8 L/min / 2.1 gpm) than the Hanomag R 35/45 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,200 kg (2,646 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | 850 kg (1,874 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 31” | EvenNo call on three-point lift: the sources do not state where the lift was measured, so the difference is not a reliable call. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,020 kg (4,453 lb) to 2,122 kg (4,678 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | 2,295 kg (5,060 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 31” | 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? | 2,600 kg (5,732 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the T-31. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 5Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | 5Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 31” | 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? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the R 35/45 and the T-31. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 19.2 km/h (11.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 31” | AheadThe Volvo T-31 has 56% more top speed (10.8 km/h / 6.7 mph) than the Hanomag R 35/45 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 597 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 31” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the R 35/45. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the T-31. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Hanomag R 35/45” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 31” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1955–1957 | 1949–1957 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Hanomag R 35/45 is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Volvo T-31 has 49% more hydraulic flow (7.8 L/min / 2.1 gpm) than the Hanomag R 35/45 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Volvo T-31 has 56% more top speed (10.8 km/h / 6.7 mph) than the Hanomag R 35/45 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Hanomag R 35/45 is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- No call on three-point lift: the sources do not state where the lift was measured, so the difference is not a reliable 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 drive: all two-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the R 35/45 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the T-31 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, a creeper range, PTO speeds and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources