Renault Ceres 95 X (A) or Renault Cergos 340?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the Ceres 95 X (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Cergos 340 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 | Ceres 95 X (A) | Cergos 340 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 62.6 kW (83.9 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ceres 95X” | 62.6 kW (83.9 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Cergos 340” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Ceres 95 X (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Cergos 340 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 Ceres 95 X (A) and the Cergos 340. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the Ceres 95 X (A) and the Cergos 340. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 52.9 L/min (14.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ceres 95X” | 54.3 L/min (14.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Cergos 340” | 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? | 4,570 kg (10,075 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ceres 95X” | 4,570 kg (10,075 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Cergos 340” | 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? | 3,455 kg (7,617 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ceres 95X” | 4,255 kg (9,381 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Cergos 340” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault Cergos 340 is 23% heavier (800 kg / 1,764 lb) than the Renault Ceres 95 X (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 5,735 kg (12,644 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ceres 95X” | 6,200 kg (13,669 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Cergos 340” | EvenEven on maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 18 to 20Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ceres 95X” | 18 to 20Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Cergos 340” | 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 Ceres 95 X (A) and the Cergos 340. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Ceres 95X” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault Cergos 340” | 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 Ceres 95X” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Cergos 340” | 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 Ceres 95 X (A) and the Cergos 340. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Ceres 95X” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault Cergos 340” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1994–1998 | 1996–2001 | 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 Cergos 340 is 23% heavier (800 kg / 1,764 lb) than the Renault Ceres 95 X (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- 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 maximum permissible mass (both maximum permissible mass, 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-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.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Ceres 95 X (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Cergos 340 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, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources