International Harvester 1055 or Renault 110-54 TX?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 1055 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 110-54 TX has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Renault 110-54 TX suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 68% (2,935 kg / 6,471 lb) more three-point lift.
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 | 1055 | 110-54 TX | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 74 kW (99 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 1055” | 73.6 kW (98.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 1055 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 110-54 TX 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 1055 and the 110-54 TX. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1055 and the 110-54 TX. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 39.9 L/min (10.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 1055” | 41.1 L/min (10.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | EvenEven on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 4,325 kg (9,535 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 1055” | 7,260 kg (16,006 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | AheadThe Renault 110-54 TX has 68% more lift (2,935 kg / 6,471 lb) than the International Harvester 1055 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 4,290 kg (9,458 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 1055” | 5,040 kg (11,111 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 110-54 TX is 17% heavier (750 kg / 1,653 lb) than the International Harvester 1055 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | — | 8,100 kg (17,857 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 1055. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 1055” | 16Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | 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 1055 and the 110-54 TX. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 1055” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | 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, “IHC 1055” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 1055. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “IHC 1055” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 110-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7912” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1977–1982 | 1989–1990 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 110-54 TX is newer: production began 12 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Renault 110-54 TX has 68% more lift (2,935 kg / 6,471 lb) than the International Harvester 1055 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Renault 110-54 TX is 17% heavier (750 kg / 1,653 lb) than the International Harvester 1055 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Renault 110-54 TX is newer: production began 12 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, 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 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.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 1055 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 110-54 TX 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 and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources