Renault 103-12 TX or Renault 103-14 TX?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 103-12 TX has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 103-14 TX has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Renault 103-14 TX suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: 21% (860 kg / 1,896 lb) heavier and four-wheel drive.
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 | 103-12 TX | 103-14 TX | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 68.4 kW (91.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-12 TX R7812” | 68.4 kW (91.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-14 TS/TX R7822” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 103-12 TX has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 103-14 TX 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 103-12 TX and the 103-14 TX. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 103-12 TX and the 103-14 TX. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 40.2 L/min (10.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-12 TX R7812” | 40.2 L/min (10.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-14 TS/TX R7822” | EvenEven on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 4,100 kg (9,039 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-12 TX R7812” | 4,100 kg (9,039 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-14 TS/TX R7822” | EvenEven on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 4,060 kg (8,951 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-12 TX R7812” | 4,920 kg (10,847 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-14 TS/TX R7822” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 103-14 TX is 21% heavier (860 kg / 1,896 lb) than the Renault 103-12 TX (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | — | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 103-12 TX and the 103-14 TX. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-12 TX R7812” | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-14 TS/TX R7822” | EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 103-12 TX and the 103-14 TX. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-12 TX R7812” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-14 TS/TX R7822” | 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? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-12 TX R7812” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-14 TS/TX R7822” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 103-12 TX and the 103-14 TX. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-12 TX R7812” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-14 TS/TX R7822” | AheadThe Renault 103-14 TX is available with four-wheel drive; the Renault 103-12 TX is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1981–1986 | 1981–1986 | 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 103-14 TX is 21% heavier (860 kg / 1,896 lb) than the Renault 103-12 TX (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Renault 103-14 TX is available with four-wheel drive; the Renault 103-12 TX is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- Even on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, 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 difference is under the 25% 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).
- 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 103-12 TX has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 103-14 TX 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, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources