Renault 70 or Volvo T-55?

Which should you choose?

The figures split: the Volvo T-55 is ahead on hydraulic flow and top speed; the Renault 70 is ahead on three-point lift.

  • The Volvo T-55 suits road haulage better on this data: 20% (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) more top speed.

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?

Buyer questions for Renault 70 and Volvo T-55, with the call on each
Question70T-55Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?28.6 kW (38.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 70 R7252”28.7 kW (38.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 55”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 70 and the T-55.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 70 and the T-55.
Which pumps more oil for implements?21.9 L/min (5.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 70 R7252”26.8 L/min (7.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 55”AheadThe Volvo T-55 has 22% more hydraulic flow (4.9 L/min / 1.3 gpm) than the Renault 70 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?1,920 kg (4,233 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 70 R7252”900 kg (1,984 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 55”AheadThe Renault 70 has 113% more lift (1,020 kg / 2,249 lb) than the Volvo T-55 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
Which is heavier, for traction?1,605 kg (3,538 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 70 R7252”2,950 kg (6,504 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 55”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Volvo T-55 is 84% heavier (1,345 kg / 2,965 lb) than the Renault 70 (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 70 and the T-55.
Which has the wider choice of gears?6 to 10Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 70 R7252”5Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 55”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 70 and the T-55.
Which is faster on the road?25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 70 R7252”30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 55”AheadThe Volvo T-55 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Renault 70 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
Which offers more PTO speeds?540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 70 R7252”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 55”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?independentTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 70 R7252”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the T-55.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 70 R7252”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 55”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1968–19761953–1959Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 70 is newer: production began 15 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Volvo T-55 has 22% more hydraulic flow (4.9 L/min / 1.3 gpm) than the Renault 70 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The Renault 70 has 113% more lift (1,020 kg / 2,249 lb) than the Volvo T-55 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
  • The Volvo T-55 is 84% heavier (1,345 kg / 2,965 lb) than the Renault 70 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Volvo T-55 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Renault 70 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • The Renault 70 is newer: production began 15 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • 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 forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
  • Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
  • 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