Renault 145-54 TX or WHITE 2-135?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 145-54 TX has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2-135 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?
| Question | 145-54 TX | 2-135 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 99.4 kW (133.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | 100.8 kW (135.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-135” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 145-54 TX has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2-135 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 145-54 TX and the 2-135. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 145-54 TX and the 2-135. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 41.1 L/min (10.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 2-135. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 8,850 kg (19,511 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | 2,903 kg (6,400 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-135” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the 145-54 TX: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942”); the 2-135: lift 610 mm behind the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-135”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 5,655 kg (12,467 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | 6,433 kg (14,182 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-135” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The WHITE 2-135 is 14% heavier (778 kg / 1,715 lb) than the Renault 145-54 TX (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 8,500 kg (18,739 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 2-135. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | 18Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-135” | 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 145-54 TX and the 2-135. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-135” | 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 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “White 2-135” | AheadThe Renault 145-54 TX offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the WHITE 2-135 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “White 2-135” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 145-54 TX. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “White 2-135” | AheadThe Renault 145-54 TX is available with four-wheel drive; the WHITE 2-135 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1989–1990 | 1976–1982 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 145-54 TX is newer: production began 13 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The WHITE 2-135 is 14% heavier (778 kg / 1,715 lb) than the Renault 145-54 TX (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Renault 145-54 TX offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the WHITE 2-135 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Renault 145-54 TX is available with four-wheel drive; the WHITE 2-135 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The Renault 145-54 TX is newer: production began 13 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- 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.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 145-54 TX has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2-135 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the 145-54 TX: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 145-54 TE/TA/TS/TX/TZ R7942”); the 2-135: lift 610 mm behind the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-135”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources