OLIVER 500 or Renault Super 5?
Which should you choose?
The figures split: the OLIVER 500 is ahead on hydraulic flow and PTO speeds; the Renault Super 5 is ahead on three-point lift.
- The OLIVER 500 suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 1000 rpm.
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 | 500 | Super 5 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 21.0 kW (28.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 500” | 21.0 kW (28.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Super 5 R7054” | 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 500 and the Super 5. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 500 and the Super 5. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 22.7 L/min (6.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 500” | 18.0 L/min (4.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Super 5 R7054” | AheadThe OLIVER 500 has 26% more hydraulic flow (4.7 L/min / 1.2 gpm) than the Renault Super 5 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 876 kg (1,931 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 500” | 1,476 kg (3,254 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Super 5 R7054” | AheadThe Renault Super 5 has 68% more lift (600 kg / 1,323 lb) than the OLIVER 500 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,680 kg (3,704 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 500” | 1,627 kg (3,587 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Super 5 R7054” | 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? | — | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 500 and the Super 5. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 6Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 500” | 6 to 10Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Super 5 R7054” | 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 500 and the Super 5. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 500” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Super 5 R7054” | 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 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 500” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Super 5 R7054” | AheadThe OLIVER 500 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Renault Super 5 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Super 5 R7054” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 500. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 500” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Super 5 R7054” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1961–1963 | 1962–1965 | 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 OLIVER 500 has 26% more hydraulic flow (4.7 L/min / 1.2 gpm) than the Renault Super 5 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Renault Super 5 has 68% more lift (600 kg / 1,323 lb) than the OLIVER 500 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The OLIVER 500 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Renault Super 5 does not (as stated by the sources).
- 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 top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on drive: all two-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, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources