New Holland TM 190 (Traktorenlexikon) or Renault Ares 836 RZ?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the TM 190 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Ares 836 RZ has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

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 New Holland TM 190 (Traktorenlexikon) and Renault Ares 836 RZ, with the call on each
QuestionTM 190Ares 836 RZCall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?142.7 kW (191.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM 190”142.8 kW (191.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 836 RZ”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TM 190 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Ares 836 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 190 and the Ares 836 RZ.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the TM 190 and the Ares 836 RZ.
Which pumps more oil for implements?108.5 L/min (28.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM 190”—No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the Ares 836 RZ.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?—11,560 kg (25,485 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 836 RZ”No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the TM 190.
Which is heavier, for traction?7,510 kg (16,557 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM 190”8,150 kg (17,968 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 836 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?12,000 kg (26,455 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM 190”12,000 kg (26,455 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 836 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 19Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM 190”32Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 836 RZ”AheadThe Renault Ares 836 RZ has 68% more forward gears (13 gears) than the New Holland TM 190 (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 190 and the Ares 836 RZ.
Which is faster on the road?40 km/h (24.9 mph) to 50 km/h (31.1 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM 190”40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 836 RZ”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?540E/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM 190”540/1000 rpmOECD test report 2109, 2004EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM 190”independentTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 836 RZ”EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
Which drives on both axles?4WDTraktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM 190”; OECD test report 2144, 20044WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Ares 836 RZ”; OECD test report 2109, 2004EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?2002–20072001–2005EvenSame 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 836 RZ has 68% more forward gears (13 gears) than the New Holland TM 190 (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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
  • 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 190 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Ares 836 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, three-point lift and a creeper range.

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