John Deere 2950 (A) or Renault 113-14 TX?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the John Deere 2950 (A): hydraulic flow.
- The John Deere 2950 (A) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 108% (45.3 L/min / 12.0 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 | 2950 (A) | 113-14 TX | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 63.4 kW (85.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 2950” | 63.8 kW (85.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-14 TX R7922” | 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 2950 (A) and the 113-14 TX. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 2950 (A) and the 113-14 TX. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 87.1 L/min (23.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 2950” | 41.8 L/min (11.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-14 TX R7922” | AheadThe John Deere 2950 (A) has 108% more hydraulic flow (45.3 L/min / 12.0 gpm) than the Renault 113-14 TX (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 4,500 kg (9,921 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-14 TX R7922” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 2950 (A). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 4,127 kg (9,098 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 2950” | 5,220 kg (11,508 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-14 TX R7922” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 113-14 TX is 26% heavier (1,093 kg / 2,410 lb) than the John Deere 2950 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 5,980 kg (13,184 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 2950” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 113-14 TX. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 2950” | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-14 TX R7922” | 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 2950 (A) and the 113-14 TX. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 2950” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-14 TX R7922” | 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, “Renault 113-14 TX R7922” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the 2950 (A). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 2950” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 113-14 TX. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 2950” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 113-14 TX R7922” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1983–1988 | 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 John Deere 2950 (A) has 108% more hydraulic flow (45.3 L/min / 12.0 gpm) than the Renault 113-14 TX (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Renault 113-14 TX is 26% heavier (1,093 kg / 2,410 lb) than the John Deere 2950 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- 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 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 drive: every machine is available with four-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.
- 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