Two field experiments were carried out in 2000 and 2001 on a sandy-loam soil to compare harrowing and hoeing for mechanical weed control in maize (Zea mays L.). One experiment investigated four different tine adjustments of a spring-tine harrow. The other experiment compared four different hoeing systems: (1) a PTO-powered rotary tiller, (2) a precision hoe with sweep and goose-foot shares, (3) a precision hoe + torsion weeder, (4) a precision hoe + torsion weeder with tines crossed. Both experiments also included a weed check. Various mechanical and agronomic parameters were determined. Results showed that the machines tested had decidedly different working characteristics. The spring-tine harrow had operative advantages but showed poor work quality. In contrast, the work quality of the precision hoes and the rotary tiller was little influenced by operative conditions. Short-term weed density reduction was unrelated either to weed biomass at harvest or to crop yield. Maize yield was higher with hoeing than with harrowing but was probably influenced by factors other than weed control. A global evaluation of the various options available for mechanical weed control in maize must take into account issues related to the different operative conditions, which may change the relative ranking of treatments from year to year.