Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) or Renault 113-12 TX?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A): hydraulic flow. It is also ahead on forward gears and drive.
- The Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 63% (26.2 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?
| Question | H-496 Turbo (A) | 113-12 TX | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 64.3 kW (86.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 496” | 63.8 kW (85.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921” | 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 H-496 Turbo (A) and the 113-12 TX. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the H-496 Turbo (A) and the 113-12 TX. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 68.0 L/min (18.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 496” | 41.8 L/min (11.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921” | AheadThe Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) has 63% more hydraulic flow (26.2 L/min / 6.9 gpm) than the Renault 113-12 TX (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 3,151 kg (6,947 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 496” | 4,500 kg (9,921 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the H-496 Turbo (A): lift through the full range at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 496”); the 113-12 TX: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,860 kg (8,510 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 496” | 4,720 kg (10,406 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 113-12 TX is 22% heavier (860 kg / 1,896 lb) than the Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) (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 H-496 Turbo (A) and the 113-12 TX. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 24Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 496” | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921” | AheadThe Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) has 100% more forward gears (12 gears) than the Renault 113-12 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 H-496 Turbo (A) and the 113-12 TX. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 496” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921” | 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, “Hürlimann H 496” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the H-496 Turbo (A) and the 113-12 TX. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 496” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921” | AheadThe Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the Renault 113-12 TX is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1984–1989 | 1981–1986 | EvenSame 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 Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) has 63% more hydraulic flow (26.2 L/min / 6.9 gpm) than the Renault 113-12 TX (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Renault 113-12 TX is 22% heavier (860 kg / 1,896 lb) than the Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) has 100% more forward gears (12 gears) than the Renault 113-12 TX (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The Hürlimann H-496 Turbo (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the Renault 113-12 TX is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- 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 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).
- Same era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the H-496 Turbo (A): lift through the full range at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 496”); the 113-12 TX: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-12 TS/TX/RE R7921”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- 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