Renault 103-52 TX or Renault 103-54 TX?
Which should you choose?
On performance, no comparable figure differs by more than its threshold: on this data the machines are level. On features, the Renault 103-54 TX is ahead on drive.
- The Renault 103-54 TX suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: 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 | 103-52 TX | 103-54 TX | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 58.4 kW (78.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-52 TE/TA/TS/TX R7821” | 58.4 kW (78.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TM R7822” | 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 103-52 TX and the 103-54 TX. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 103-52 TX and the 103-54 TX. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 42.0 L/min (11.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-52 TE/TA/TS/TX R7821” | 42.0 L/min (11.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TM 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? | 6,200 kg (13,669 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-52 TE/TA/TS/TX R7821” | 6,200 kg (13,669 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TM 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? | 4,375 kg (9,645 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-52 TE/TA/TS/TX R7821” | 4,690 kg (10,340 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TM R7822” | 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? | — | 7,095 kg (15,642 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TM R7822” | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 103-52 TX. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-52 TE/TA/TS/TX R7821” | 16Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TM 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 103-52 TX and the 103-54 TX. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-52 TE/TA/TS/TX R7821” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TM 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 103-52 TE/TA/TS/TX R7821” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TM 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 103-52 TX and the 103-54 TX. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-52 TE/TA/TS/TX R7821” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 103-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TM R7822” | AheadThe Renault 103-54 TX is available with four-wheel drive; the Renault 103-52 TX is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1989–1990 | 1989–1990 | 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 103-54 TX is available with four-wheel drive; the Renault 103-52 TX is two-wheel drive (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 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 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 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.
- 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