Mini Excavator Size Comparison Chart: Dimensions by Class
Compact excavators are sold under model names rather than sizes, which makes comparing them unnecessarily hard. One brand's "18" weighs 1.7 tonnes; another's "20" weighs 2.1 tonnes. If you compare model numbers you will draw the wrong conclusion almost every time.
The fix is to ignore the badge and compare published dimensions. This chart sets out the dimensions that matter across the compact range, explains what each one controls, and shows how to line up two machines of nominally the same size and see where they genuinely differ.
The Dimensions That Actually Matter
A compact excavator spec sheet runs to two or three pages, but only a handful of numbers change what the machine can do on site:
- Operating weight — machine ready to work with fuel and operator. The anchor figure for every other comparison.
- Transport width — overall width with tracks retracted and extended. Determines access.
- Transport height — with the boom lowered. Determines whether the machine passes under lintels and into containers.
- Maximum dig depth — with the standard arm. Determines which jobs are possible.
- Maximum reach at ground level — how far the bucket lands from the tracks. Determines how often you reposition.
- Maximum dump height — whether you can load a skip or truck.
- Tail swing radius — how much clearance the house body needs behind it.
Compact Size Comparison Chart
The figures below are indicative industry ranges for each class. Individual machines vary; treat these as the frame, then check the specific spec sheet.
| Class | Operating weight | Transport width (retracted) | Transport height | Max dig depth | Reach at ground | Dump height |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Micro 0.8 t | 800–1,000 kg | 700–950 mm | 1,500–1,800 mm | 1.6–1.9 m | 2.8–3.2 m | 1.8–2.2 m |
| 1 t | 1,000–1,300 kg | 900–1,100 mm | 1,700–2,100 mm | 1.8–2.1 m | 3.0–3.4 m | 2.0–2.4 m |
| 1.5 t | 1,500–1,800 kg | 980–1,150 mm | 2,100–2,400 mm | 2.1–2.3 m | 3.5–3.9 m | 2.3–2.7 m |
| 1.8–2 t | 1,800–2,100 kg | 1,000–1,300 mm | 2,200–2,500 mm | 2.2–2.6 m | 3.8–4.2 m | 2.5–2.9 m |
| 2.5–3 t | 2,500–3,200 kg | 1,300–1,600 mm | 2,400–2,700 mm | 2.5–2.9 m | 4.2–4.8 m | 2.9–3.4 m |
| 3.5 t | 3,500–3,900 kg | 1,600–1,800 mm | 2,500–2,800 mm | 2.9–3.2 m | 4.8–5.3 m | 3.3–3.7 m |
Reading the Chart Properly
Notice how little dig depth grows relative to weight. Moving from a 1 tonne machine to a 3.5 tonne machine — roughly three and a half times the mass — adds about a metre of depth. Reach grows rather more, and dump height grows most of all relative to size, which is why loading skips is where larger compact machines pull ahead.
Width is the figure with the sharpest practical consequence. Between the micro class and the 2.5 t class, transport width roughly doubles, and that is the difference between fitting through a domestic gate and needing a double gate or an open driveway.
Comparing Two Machines of the Same Nominal Size
When two machines are both described as "2 tonne", run this side-by-side check. The differences are usually in the last three rows.
| Check | Why it matters | What to look for |
|---|---|---|
| Operating weight | Model names are not standards | The heavier machine is usually more stable, and harder to tow |
| Track gauge range | Access and stability | Wider extension gives more stability; narrower retraction gives access |
| Arm configuration | Depth vs breakout | Long-arm variants trade some breakout force for depth |
| Auxiliary hydraulic flow | Attachment capability | Higher flow means more attachments, and faster cycling |
| Boom swing | Working along walls | Boom side-swing allows offset digging without repositioning |
| Tail swing | Working in confined space | Short or zero tail swing costs more but works against obstacles |
| Bucket range offered | Versatility | A wide factory bucket range saves sourcing aftermarket |
Translating Dimensions into Site Reality
- Gate width 900 mm: you need a machine with retracted transport width below about 800 mm. In practice that means the micro or 1 t class with a variable-gauge undercarriage.
- Trench to 2 m: a 1.5 t class machine covers it with margin; a 1 t class machine will be at or past its limit.
- Loading a 1.2 m high skip: almost any compact machine manages it, but check dump height at the reach you need, not at minimum radius.
- Working against a boundary wall: short tail swing, or a boom side-swing function, matters more than any dimension in the chart.
- Container or van transport: check transport height with the boom lowered, plus overall length on the tracks.
Mistakes to Avoid When Reading a Size Chart
- Comparing labelled tonnage. Always compare published operating weight.
- Quoting maximum dig depth as working depth. Maximum figures assume level ground and a standard arm.
- Using extended-track width for access planning. Only the retracted figure passes gates.
- Ignoring the bucket that comes with the machine. A larger bucket reduces effective reach and depth slightly.
- Overlooking transport length. Length determines which trailer you need just as much as weight does.
Making the Chart Work for You
Print the comparison, fill in the two or three machines you are considering, and mark any row where a machine fails a hard constraint — access, transport, depth. Failures eliminate machines; everything else is preference. That turns a two-page spec sheet into a one-line decision.
Every machine in the mini excavator collection publishes operating weight, transport width and height, dig depth, reach and dump height, so this comparison can be done directly — for example between the compact SDLE12 and the larger SDLE35.
