International Harvester FU-265 D or Renault D 35?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the FU-265 D has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the D 35 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The International Harvester FU-265 D suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 43% (5.6 L/min / 1.5 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Renault D 35 suits road haulage better on this data: 19% (4.0 km/h / 2.5 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 | FU-265 D | D 35 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 25.7 kW (34.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-265 D” | 25.8 kW (34.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault D35 R7050” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the FU-265 D has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the D 35 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 FU-265 D and the D 35. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the FU-265 D and the D 35. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 18.6 L/min (4.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-265 D” | 13.0 L/min (3.4 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault D35 R7050” | AheadThe International Harvester FU-265 D has 43% more hydraulic flow (5.6 L/min / 1.5 gpm) than the Renault D 35 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 1,300 kg (2,866 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault D35 R7050” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the FU-265 D. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,820 kg (4,012 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-265 D” | 1,623 kg (3,578 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault D35 R7050” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The International Harvester FU-265 D is 12% heavier (197 kg / 434 lb) than the Renault D 35 (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 FU-265 D and the D 35. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 6Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-265 D” | 6 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Renault D35 R7050” | 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? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the FU-265 D and the D 35. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 21 km/h (13.0 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-265 D” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault D35 R7050” | AheadThe Renault D 35 has 19% more top speed (4.0 km/h / 2.5 mph) than the International Harvester FU-265 D (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 549 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-265 D” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault D35 R7050” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the FU-265 D. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the FU-265 D and the D 35. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-265 D” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault D35 R7050” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1959–1961 | 1956–1960 | 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 International Harvester FU-265 D has 43% more hydraulic flow (5.6 L/min / 1.5 gpm) than the Renault D 35 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The International Harvester FU-265 D is 12% heavier (197 kg / 434 lb) than the Renault D 35 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Renault D 35 has 19% more top speed (4.0 km/h / 2.5 mph) than the International Harvester FU-265 D (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on drive: all two-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.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the FU-265 D has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the D 35 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, PTO speeds and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources