New Holland TM165 or SAME Rubin 160?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the TM165 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Rubin 160 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The SAME Rubin 160 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 29% (2,270 kg / 5,004 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 | TM165 | Rubin 160 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 117.7 kW (157.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM165” | 117.7 kW (157.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Rubin 160” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TM165 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Rubin 160 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 TM165 and the Rubin 160. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the TM165 and the Rubin 160. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the TM165 and the Rubin 160. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 7,730 kg (17,042 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM165” | 10,000 kg (22,046 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Rubin 160” | AheadThe SAME Rubin 160 has 29% more lift (2,270 kg / 5,004 lb) than the New Holland TM165 (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 TM165” | 6,800 kg (14,991 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Rubin 160” | 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? | 10,500 kg (23,149 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM165” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the Rubin 160. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 18 to 28Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM165” | 18 to 27Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Rubin 160” | 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 TM165 and the Rubin 160. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM165” | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “SAME Rubin 160” | 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 TM165” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “SAME Rubin 160” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM165” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “SAME Rubin 160” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “New Holland TM165” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “SAME Rubin 160” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1999–2002 | 2000–2004 | 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 SAME Rubin 160 has 29% more lift (2,270 kg / 5,004 lb) than the New Holland TM165 (both lift at the hitch ends, 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 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 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 TM165 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Rubin 160 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, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources