The short answer
| Format | Net m³ in a 40’HC | Sheets (1.5 mm) | Gross weight | Floor utilisation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2600 × 1300 | 33 m³ | 6,509 | 20.5–22.4 t | 47.8% |
| 1600 × 1600 | 38 m³ | 9,896 | 23.6–25.8 t | 63.3% |
| 1300 × 1300 | 40 m³ | 15,779 | 24.8–27.2 t | 66.4% |
| 420 × 420 (blanks) | 42 m³ | ~158,700 | 26–28 t | highest |
Where the difference comes from: internal width
The internal width of a 40’HC is roughly 2352 mm. That single number drives the whole calculation.
A bundle 2600 mm long will not turn across that width. The bundles can therefore only be laid lengthwise, which leaves unusable strips along the floor. Floor utilisation stalls at 47.8% — more than half the floor area sits empty.
A square 1600 mm bundle can be laid either way. Once the stacking pattern is free, floor utilisation climbs to 63.3% and another 5 m³ goes into the same box.
Full loading table
| Transport unit | Format | Net m³ | Gross t | Floor use | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boxcar | 2600 × 1300 | 102 | — | — | Loaded directly from our own rail siding on site. |
| 40'HC container | 1600 × 1600 | 38 | 23.6–25.8 | 63.3% | Limited by weight, not volume. The most efficient container format. |
| 40'HC container | 1300 × 1300 | 40 | 24.8–27.2 | 66.4% | Fast breakdown into parts, less warehouse space. |
| 40'HC container | 2600 × 1300 | 33 | 20.5–22.4 | 47.8% | A 2600 mm bundle does not fit the 2352 mm inner width — lengthwise only. |
| Euro truck (13.6 m) | 2600 × 1300 / 1600 × 1600 | 34 | 20.0–22.0 | — | Always weight-limited: 82–92 m³ of space but only 20–22 t of payload. |
| 20'DV container | 2600 × 1300 | 15 | 9.3–10.2 | 49.0% | Only 35% of payload used. Not recommended for veneer — you pay for air. |
When the weight limit takes over
Birch veneer has a density of 620–680 kg/m³. Which limit the container hits first depends on the format:
- 2600 × 1300 → limited by geometry. 33 m³ works out at about 21.5 tonnes, well below the container’s 26–28 tonne payload. You pay for the weight you did not ship all the same.
- 1600 × 1600 → approaching the mass limit. 38 m³ is 23.6–25.8 tonnes. This is where the gain stops: adding more cubic metres means going over the weight limit.
- 1300 × 1300 and 420 × 420 → limited by mass. 40–42 m³ and 25–28 tonnes. In these formats the container works at full capacity.
The practical conclusion: there is a ceiling on what changing format can win you, and the square format has already taken most of it.
Freight per cubic metre
Container freight does not depend on how many cubic metres are inside. So the freight cost of a cubic metre is set entirely by how well you load.
| Format | Net m³ | Freight per container | Freight per m³ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2600 × 1300 | 33 | ~3,960 USD | 120 USD |
| 1600 × 1600 | 38 | ~3,960 USD | 104 USD |
| 1300 × 1300 | 40 | ~3,960 USD | 99 USD |
| 420 × 420 | 42 | ~3,960 USD | 94 USD |
The calculator below takes a volume and a route and returns the number of containers, the goods value and an estimated CIF total. The default example is 102 m³ — one railcar.
Batch calculator
- Railcars
- 1
- 40'HC containers
- 3
- Goods value (EXW)
- $22,313
- 1,785,000 ₽
- Freight
- $12,240
Example: 102 m³ — one full railcar
Calculated from the published price list and the upper bound of each route range. Not a binding offer — write to us for a firm price.
Which transport unit to choose
| Situation | What to take | Why |
|---|---|---|
| First shipment, trial | 40’HC, 2600 × 1300 | Standard format, certain to suit your press |
| Regular purchasing, square press | 40’HC, 1600 × 1600 | Freight per m³ is 13% lower |
| Over 100 m³ a month | Covered railcar | 102 m³, loaded direct from the site |
| Small trial batch | Still a 40’HC | A 20’DV uses 35% of the payload and unit cost rises |
| Urgent, small volume | Truck | Fast, but the mass limit is 20–22 tonnes |
Route options, transit times and freight ranges are on the logistics page. Product pages by format: 2600 × 1300 and 1600 × 1600.