Renault N 31 or Volvo T-34?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Volvo T-34: hydraulic flow. It is also ahead on top speed.
- The Volvo T-34 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 70% (9.8 L/min / 2.6 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Volvo T-34 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?
| Question | N 31 | T-34 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 28.3 kW (38.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault N, E, V31 R3051” | 28.3 kW (38.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 34” | 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 N 31 and the T-34. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the N 31 and the T-34. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 14.0 L/min (3.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault N, E, V31 R3051” | 23.8 L/min (6.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 34” | AheadThe Volvo T-34 has 70% more hydraulic flow (9.8 L/min / 2.6 gpm) than the Renault N 31 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 850 kg (1,874 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 34” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the N 31. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,545 kg (3,406 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault N, E, V31 R3051” | 2,280 kg (5,027 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 34” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Volvo T-34 is 48% heavier (735 kg / 1,620 lb) than the Renault N 31 (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 N 31 and the T-34. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 6 to 10Traktorenlexikon, “Renault N, E, V31 R3051” | 5Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 34” | 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 N 31 and the T-34. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault N, E, V31 R3051” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 34” | AheadThe Volvo T-34 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Renault N 31 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault N, E, V31 R3051” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 34” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the N 31 and the T-34. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault N, E, V31 R3051” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo T 34” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1957–1962 | 1952–1957 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault N 31 is newer: production began 5 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-34 has 70% more hydraulic flow (9.8 L/min / 2.6 gpm) than the Renault N 31 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Volvo T-34 is 48% heavier (735 kg / 1,620 lb) than the Renault N 31 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Volvo T-34 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Renault N 31 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Renault N 31 is newer: production began 5 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, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources