Freight equipment
40ft dry container
The 40ft container is the default unit of containerised trade. It exists for cargo that runs out of room before it runs out of weight allowance.
- Mode
- Ocean
- Published figures
- 7, each with a named publisher
The box that cubes out
Most manufactured goods are bulky relative to their weight. Packaged consumer products, textiles, plastic goods, components in protective packaging and furniture all fill a container's space long before they approach its weight limit.
For that cargo the 40ft is the economic unit: it roughly doubles the space of a 20ft box for considerably less than double the cost of moving it, and the weight limit never becomes the binding constraint.
Two twenties are not one forty
It is tempting to treat the choice as arithmetic, and it is not. Two 20ft containers carry substantially more total weight than one 40ft, because each brings its own payload allowance. They also cost two sets of handling, two road movements, two sets of terminal charges and two deliveries.
The reverse case matters just as much: a 40ft box cannot be split between two delivery addresses without unpacking it, while two 20ft units can go to two places. Which arrangement is cheaper depends on the weight, the destinations and the handling at each end, and it is worth asking rather than assuming the larger box wins.
Where a longer box stops being deliverable
A 40ft container arrives on a vehicle that needs room to approach, turn and be positioned. Urban sites, older industrial premises and yards with a tight entrance often cannot take one, even when they handle 20ft units routinely.
This is the most common avoidable failure on a full-container import: the box is right for the cargo and wrong for the address. Access is established before the unit is chosen, not after the vehicle has been dispatched.
Rated weights differ between operators
Maximum gross weight for a 40ft dry container is not a single industry figure. Among the publishers checked for this page it is stated at two materially different values — a divergence of more than two tonnes in the rating itself, not a rounding of the same number. Both are in the specification table below, each against the operator that publishes it.
That difference flows straight into the payload a shipper may plan against. It is settled from the specification of the container actually being supplied, and by the road limits at each end, rather than from a general figure.
Suited to
What this equipment is for.
- Manufactured and packaged goods that fill space before reaching weight
- Full-container consignments to a single delivery address
- Cargo where handling cost per unit of volume is the deciding factor
Specifications
Published figures, and who publishes them.
These are not industry constants. Each figure below is one named publisher’s statement about its own equipment on the date it was checked, and where publishers disagree the row says so. For a specific shipment, the specification that matters is the one for the actual vehicle or container being used.
40ft
- Internal dimensions
- 12,032 x 2,352 x 2,395 (L x W x H) mmInternal length 12,032 mm is unanimous across all four publishers — unusually stable, and the one dimension here that can be stated plainly. Width 2,350-2,352 mm and height 2,390-2,395 mm still vary (Maersk 2,350 x 2,393; ONE 2,350 x 2,390; CIMC 2,352 x 2,393; Hapag-Lloyd 2,352 x 2,395).Hapag-Lloyd — source, checked 2026-08-14
- Door opening
- 2,340 x 2,292 (W x H) mmWidth 2,340 mm is unanimous across all four publishers. Height varies 2,274-2,292 mm (Maersk 2,274; ONE and CIMC 2,280; Hapag-Lloyd 2,292).Hapag-Lloyd — source, checked 2026-08-14
- External dimensions
- 12,192 x 2,438 x 2,591 (L x W x H) mmManufacturer source; no carrier among those I fetched publishes external dimensions for dry containers. Corroborated indirectly by ONE, which prints the identical 12,192 x 2,438 x 2,591 as the outside measurement of its 40ft flat rack. Note the height 2,591 mm (8'6") is what distinguishes this from the high cube at 2,896 mm.CIMC Intermodal Equilink (container manufacturer) — source, checked 2026-08-14
- Tare weight
- 3,640-3,750 (ONE 3,640; CIMC 3,660; Maersk 3,700; Hapag-Lloyd 3,750) kg110 kg spread. Separately, Hapag-Lloyd's page prints this value as '3.750' with a full stop rather than a comma — a typographic error on their side; the accompanying 8,267 lb confirms 3,750 kg. Do not copy the string as printed.Ocean Network Express (low endpoint); high endpoint Hapag-Lloyd at https://www.hapag-lloyd.com/en/services-information/cargo-fleet/container/40-standard.html — source, checked 2026-08-14
- Maximum gross weight
- 30,480 or 32,500 depending on operator (Hapag-Lloyd, Maersk and CIMC 32,500; ONE 30,480) kgThis is a genuine 2,020 kg divergence in the rating itself, not a rounding difference, and it is the single most consequential variation in the dataset: ONE rates its 40ft dry fleet at 30,480 kg while three other publishers rate at 32,500 kg. Both endpoints reconcile internally (ONE 3,640 + 26,840 = 30,480; Hapag-Lloyd 3,750 + 28,750 = 32,500). Publishing either alone as 'the' 40ft limit would be wrong for a large part of the market.Hapag-Lloyd (32,500); the 30,480 figure is Ocean Network Express at https://www.one-line.com/en/dry-containers — source, checked 2026-08-14
- Payload
- 26,840-28,840 (ONE 26,840; Hapag-Lloyd 28,750; Maersk 28,800; CIMC 28,840) kgThe 2,000 kg spread is driven almost entirely by the max gross divergence above, not by tare — ONE's lower payload follows from its 30,480 kg rating. Quoting the high end to a shipper whose box turns out to be rated 30,480 kg would overstate capacity by roughly two tonnes.Ocean Network Express (low endpoint); high endpoint CIMC at https://www.cimc-equilink.com/products/shipping_containers/standard_container/3481.html — source, checked 2026-08-14
- Cubic capacity
- 67.0-67.7 (Maersk 67; ONE 67.6; Hapag-Lloyd and CIMC 67.7) m3Maersk rounds to whole cubic metres. Geometric capacity to the load line, not usable volume.Hapag-Lloyd (67.7); low endpoint Maersk (67) at https://www.maersk.com/~/media_sc9/maersk/local-information/files/africa/south-africa/important-information/container-type-and-sizes/dry-equipment-specifications-updated.pdf — source, checked 2026-08-14
Considerations
What constrains it.
- Access at delivery for a longer vehicle, which is where full-container imports most often fail
- Maximum gross weight varies between operators by more than two tonnes
- One box cannot serve two delivery addresses without being unpacked
- For dense cargo the space is wasted, and a 20ft unit is the cheaper answer
From equipment to load plan
Confirm the unit against the actual cargo.
Suitability depends on the goods, loading method and the specification of the equipment that will actually be used.
European road freight