Skid Steer vs Compact Track Loader
The two are near-identical in the cab and share attachments, but differ where it counts: across our whole population, compact track loaders run a median 9,360 lb (37% heavier than skid steers), 74 hp (19% more powerful), and rate 2,650 lb of lift (39% more). The real decision, though, is tracks vs wheels — terrain, flotation, speed, and undercarriage cost.
✓ Population statistics — every figure spans our full class, with its sample size; method →| Specification | Skid steer | CTL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operating weightmedian · typical range (p10–p90) | 6,810lb 4,430–8,620 · n=334 | 9,360lb 6,200–11,300 · n=182 | CTL 37% higher |
| Engine powermedian · typical range (p10–p90) | 62hp 37–84 · n=335 | 74hp 50–95 · n=167 | CTL 19% higher |
| Rated operating capacitymedian · typical range (p10–p90) | 1,910lb 1,230–2,870 · n=288 | 2,650lb 1,360–4,000 · n=156 | CTL 39% higher |
| Bucket capacitywhere reported — secondary | 0.6yd³n=170 of 360 | 0.6yd³n=54 of 184 | Comparable |
Which type do you need?
Size, power & lift
- CTLs are the heavier class: median 9,360 lb vs 6,810 lb (≈37% more) — more machine to transport and a higher purchase tier.
- They carry more engine power (74 vs 62 hp) and rate 39% more lift (2,650 vs 1,910 lb rated operating capacity) — so a CTL genuinely does more work per pass, not just weighs more.
- Bucket capacity is comparable where reported (both ≈0.6 yd³ median), so material volume per pass is not the deciding factor.
Tracks vs wheels
- Soft or wet ground: tracks spread weight over a large contact area for flotation and less rutting; wheels concentrate load and can sink. Choose a CTL.
- Hard surfaces & speed: wheeled skid steers travel faster and roll more efficiently on pavement, and suit tight-space, high-cycle work (snow, pallets, cleanup). Choose a skid steer.
- Operating cost: rubber-track undercarriages wear and are costly to replace; tires are cheaper to maintain and swap — the CTL's higher capability comes with higher running cost.
Ground-pressure, flotation, and undercarriage-cost points are general engineering guidance — we do not hold those as measured figures, so no numbers are asserted for them.
How this comparison is built. Every figure is a statistic over our full population of each class — not a single machine — using only values that passed QA (suppressed values are excluded, never counted as zero). Sample size (n) is shown with each figure. The comparison axes are operating weight, engine power, and rated operating capacity, each populated for 80%+ of both classes. Bucket capacity is shown where reported (under half of each class publishes it). Tipping load is deliberately held out: only 57% of track loaders publish it, too few to characterise the class honestly. Dig depth does not apply to loaders. No figure on this page is estimated.