It really comes down to a question of weight vs robustness and precision vs less-precise.
Wood cameras are (usually) lighter, but not as solid or resistant to abuse. Metal field cameras often, but not always, have a bit more precision in the controls for the movements (really though, not always).
If weight is an issue, there is certainly a lighter-weight option in a wooden field camera that you can find. Metal cameras are just too heavy for the type of work I do; hiking, biking with the camera, working in rough terrain, etc.
Like Ian, I've been using Wista DXs for years. The camera weighs in right at three pounds. That, with a set of lightweight lenses, and I have a four-lens 4x5 kit that weighs less than a medium-format camera and a couple of lenses.
When I work in cities, I need a camera that has lots of movements, specifically lots of front rise, one way or the other, and flexible enough bellows for using lenses in the 75-90mm range. The Wista DX is not ideal for this; the bellows get tight and crimp with short lenses and lots of movements. One can work around all this with a recessed lensboard and care, and I've done a lot of that kind of work with my DXs.
However, a few years back I acquired a Wista SW; basically a DX with interchangeable bellows. It has become my go-to camera for architectural work. The wide-angle bellows are half pleated and half bag bellows, will take lenses up to 210mm (for longer, I have to change to the "standard" pleated bellows), and enable me to use quite extreme movements with short lenses. I can easily vignette my 90mm Nikkor SW. Wista SWs are pretty rare, though.
If I were to consider replacing my Wistas with cameras that are now currently available and economical, I'd be looking closely at the Chamonix cameras. They have "universal" bellows that work well with short lenses and more maximum bellows draw than the Wistas (and many other wooden folders of that ilk), which max out at 300mm (I manage to use a 300mm lens on my Wistas by using a top-hat lens board).
A word about movements and field cameras: although monorails almost always have a greater range of movements, the movements available on many field cameras are more than adequate for even demanding architectural work if you know a couple of tricks. One can get more effective rise or shift by using the point-and-swing technique. For example, if you need more rise, you can point the camera up and tilt both standards back to perpendicular with the ground and parallel to each other. This gives you rise without even using the rise movement, which you can then use for even more rise. Same with shifts 90° transposed. And, you can get more back tilt by tilting the front forward and then re-leveling the front standard using the tripod head. This gives you effective back tilt that you can increase by using the actual back tilt. FWIW, I've never had to do this in practice. Do get a camera with shift on one of the standards, though; I hate not having a bit of shift to fine-tune the framing with.
Hope this helps,
Doremus