Choosing Between CTL and MTL for Compact Track Loader Applications

[MikePhua]

The Rise of Compact Track Loaders in Modern Earthmoving
Compact track loaders (CTLs) and multi-terrain loaders (MTLs) have become essential tools across construction, landscaping, agriculture, and utility sectors. Their ability to operate in soft ground, climb steep grades, and maneuver in tight spaces has made them a preferred alternative to wheeled skid steers in many environments. Since their emergence in the 1990s, CTLs and MTLs have evolved into distinct categories, each with unique undercarriage designs and performance characteristics.
Manufacturers like Caterpillar, Bobcat, ASV, and Kubota have contributed to the widespread adoption of these machines. Caterpillar introduced its first MTLs in partnership with ASV, while Bobcat focused on CTLs with steel-embedded tracks. By 2020, compact track loaders accounted for over 30% of all compact equipment sales in North America, with annual unit sales exceeding 75,000.
Understanding the Structural Differences
The primary distinction between CTLs and MTLs lies in their undercarriage design:

• CTL (Compact Track Loader)
  • Uses steel-embedded rubber tracks
    
  • Features rigid undercarriage with steel rollers and sprockets
    
  • Designed for durability in abrasive and rocky terrain
    
  • Higher ground pressure (typically 4.5–5.5 psi)
    
• MTL (Multi-Terrain Loader)
  

• Uses flexible rubber tracks without steel reinforcement
  
• Features suspended undercarriage with torsion axles or bogie wheels
  
• Optimized for low ground pressure and minimal soil disturbance
  
• Lower ground pressure (typically 3.5–4.2 psi)
  

These structural differences affect traction, ride quality, and long-term maintenance. CTLs are built for harsh conditions, while MTLs excel in sensitive environments like turf, sand, and wet clay.
A contractor in Alberta once used an MTL to grade a golf course fairway. The machine’s low ground pressure prevented rutting and preserved turf integrity, outperforming a heavier CTL that had previously caused surface damage.
Performance and Application Suitability
Choosing between CTL and MTL depends on jobsite conditions and operational priorities:

• CTL Advantages
  • Superior durability on gravel, demolition debris, and rocky soil
    
  • Longer track life under abrasive conditions
    
  • Better pushing power for grading and dozing
    
  • Easier to service with standard track tools
    
• MTL Advantages
  

• Smoother ride over uneven terrain
  
• Reduced soil compaction for landscaping and agriculture
  
• Lower vibration for operator comfort
  
• Ideal for snow removal and turf-sensitive work
  

Typical use cases:

• CTL: road building, site prep, forestry, demolition
  
• MTL: landscaping, irrigation trenching, equestrian facility maintenance, golf course construction
  

A technician in Chile retrofitted his MTL with turf-friendly tracks and used it to install drainage systems in a vineyard. The machine’s gentle footprint allowed work between rows without damaging root zones.
Maintenance and Operating Costs
Maintenance profiles differ significantly between CTLs and MTLs:

• CTL Maintenance
  • Track replacement every 1,200–1,800 hours
    
  • Steel rollers and sprockets require periodic greasing
    
  • Undercarriage cleaning essential to prevent packed debris
    
  • Higher repair costs if steel components are damaged
    
• MTL Maintenance
  

• Track replacement every 800–1,200 hours
  
• Bogie wheels and torsion axles need inspection for wear
  
• More susceptible to tearing in sharp terrain
  
• Lower parts cost but more frequent replacement
  

Fuel consumption is similar across both types, averaging 2.5–3.5 gallons per hour depending on load and attachment. However, CTLs may consume slightly more fuel during aggressive grading due to higher friction.
A fleet manager in Texas tracked operating costs across 12 machines. His CTLs averaged $4.20/hour in undercarriage maintenance, while MTLs averaged $3.10/hour but required more frequent downtime for track replacement.
Operator Experience and Ride Quality
MTLs generally offer a smoother ride due to their suspended undercarriage. This reduces operator fatigue and improves control over delicate surfaces. CTLs, while more rugged, can transmit more vibration through the cab, especially on hard surfaces.
Cab features that enhance comfort:

• Air-suspension seats
  
• Joystick controls with adjustable sensitivity
  
• Noise insulation and climate control
  
• Rearview cameras and LED lighting
  

A restorer in Ontario added a suspension seat and joystick dampeners to his CTL, improving comfort during long grading shifts on rocky terrain.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The decision between CTL and MTL should be based on terrain type, jobsite sensitivity, and long-term operating goals. While CTLs offer unmatched durability and pushing power, MTLs provide superior ride quality and minimal ground disturbance.
Recommendations include:

• Use CTLs for abrasive, rocky, or demolition-heavy environments
  
• Choose MTLs for turf, sand, snow, or soft soil applications
  
• Factor in undercarriage wear and replacement intervals
  
• Train operators in terrain-specific techniques to reduce wear
  
• Document operating hours and service actions to optimize fleet performance
  

With the right match, both CTLs and MTLs deliver exceptional productivity—each carving its own path across the landscape of modern compact equipment.