New Holland TM 150 (Traktorenlexikon) or Renault Ares 696 RZ?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the TM 150 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Ares 696 RZ has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Renault Ares 696 RZ suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 24% (1,684 kg / 3,713 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 | TM 150 | Ares 696 RZ | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 103 kW (138 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150” | 103 kW (138 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 696 RZ” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TM 150 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Ares 696 RZ 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 TM 150 and the Ares 696 RZ. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the TM 150 and the Ares 696 RZ. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 118.2 L/min (31.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the Ares 696 RZ. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 6,956 kg (15,335 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150” | 8,640 kg (19,048 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 696 RZ” | AheadThe Renault Ares 696 RZ has 24% more lift (1,684 kg / 3,713 lb) than the New Holland TM 150 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 6,333 kg (13,962 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150” | 6,035 kg (13,305 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 696 RZ” | 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? | 10,000 kg (22,046 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150” | 9,250 kg (20,393 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 696 RZ” | EvenEven on maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 18 to 24Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150” | 32Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 696 RZ” | AheadThe Renault Ares 696 RZ has 33% more forward gears (8 gears) than the New Holland TM 150 (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the TM 150 and the Ares 696 RZ. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150” | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 696 RZ” | EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/540E/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150” | 540/1000/540E/1000E rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 696 RZ” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 696 RZ” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM150”; OECD test report 1920, 2000 | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 696 RZ”; OECD test report 2026, 2002; OECD test report 2122, 2004 | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1999–2002 | 2001–2005 | 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 Renault Ares 696 RZ has 24% more lift (1,684 kg / 3,713 lb) than the New Holland TM 150 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Renault Ares 696 RZ has 33% more forward gears (8 gears) than the New Holland TM 150 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- Even on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- 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.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TM 150 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Ares 696 RZ 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, hydraulic flow and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources