Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) or Renault 75-12 LS?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Renault 75-12 LS: hydraulic flow, three-point lift and maximum permissible mass. It is also ahead on top speed and PTO speeds. On features, the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) is ahead on drive.

  • The Renault 75-12 LS suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 1000 rpm.
  • The Renault 75-12 LS suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 85% (13.9 L/min / 3.7 gpm) more hydraulic flow and 56% (1,375 kg / 3,031 lb) more three-point lift.
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: four-wheel drive.
  • The Renault 75-12 LS suits road haulage better on this data: 13% (650 kg / 1,433 lb) more maximum permissible mass and 20% (5.0 km/h / 3.1 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?

Buyer questions for Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) and Renault 75-12 LS, with the call on each
QuestionMF 188 und 188 (A)75-12 LSCall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?46.3 kW (62 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”46.3 kW (62.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”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 MF 188 und 188 (A) and the 75-12 LS.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the MF 188 und 188 (A) and the 75-12 LS.
Which pumps more oil for implements?16.4 L/min (4.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”30.3 L/min (8.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”AheadThe Renault 75-12 LS has 85% more hydraulic flow (13.9 L/min / 3.7 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?2,450 kg (5,401 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”3,825 kg (8,433 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”AheadThe Renault 75-12 LS has 56% more lift (1,375 kg / 3,031 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
Which is heavier, for traction?3,180 kg (7,011 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”2,990 kg (6,592 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”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?5,000 kg (11,023 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”5,650 kg (12,456 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”AheadThe Renault 75-12 LS has 13% higher maximum permissible mass (650 kg / 1,433 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source).
Which has the wider choice of gears?8 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”12 to 24Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”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 MF 188 und 188 (A) and the 75-12 LS.
Which is faster on the road?25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”AheadThe Renault 75-12 LS has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
Which offers more PTO speeds?540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”AheadThe Renault 75-12 LS offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) does not (as stated by the sources).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”independentTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
Which drives on both axles?2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 188 & MF 188A”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 75-12 LS R3141”AheadThe Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the Renault 75-12 LS is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
Which is newer, and what about parts?1972–1985–1989Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 75-12 LS is newer: production began 13 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Renault 75-12 LS has 85% more hydraulic flow (13.9 L/min / 3.7 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The Renault 75-12 LS has 56% more lift (1,375 kg / 3,031 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
  • The Renault 75-12 LS has 13% higher maximum permissible mass (650 kg / 1,433 lb) than the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source).
  • The Renault 75-12 LS has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • The Renault 75-12 LS offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) does not (as stated by the sources).
  • The Massey Ferguson MF 188 und 188 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the Renault 75-12 LS is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
  • The Renault 75-12 LS is newer: production began 13 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • 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 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
  • Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
  • No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power and a creeper range.

← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources