This table provides a comparison of these two tractive methods for harvesting equipment.
| Tracks | Wheels | |
| Tractive power | High compared to its weight and power | Lower |
| Soil damage - compaction | Less – weight is distributed over a large area, thus the specific soil pressure is lower | High – weight distributed over a smaller area (band tracks can help) |
| Soil damage – top soil | More damage to organic matter and cutting effect of topsoil | If used properly, damage to organic matter is much less. Comparatively lower. |
| Costs | Track cost is comparatively higher – especially when working in very rocky areas and sandy soils. Long life can reduce overall cost. | Comparatively lower. Machines with many wheels can have high tyre costs, especially with high tyre wear and the use of specialised forestry tyres. |
| Ground clearance | Lower for construction excavators, but similar to wheels for purpose-built machines | Higher |
| Movement speed | Slower | Faster |
| Centre of gravity | Lower and more stable, can be used on steep terrain | Higher, more unstable, especially if articulated |
| Turning circle | Tighter – can turn in the length of the vehicle | Wider |
| Transport over long distances | Must be loaded onto a truck | Can drive a reasonable distance and less damage to roads. Care must be taken not to exceed manufacturer specifications |
| Maintenance | Less regular but at a higher cost and longer time | More frequent but cheaper and less time used |
| Flexibility for different conditions | Not flexible, tracks cannot be changed. | More flexible, wheel chains and band tracks can be used. |
| Fuel consumption | Heavier | Lighter |
Source: Michal and Andrew