Skip to content
HEAVYEQUIPMENTS.net
SPECS / COMPARISON

Wacker Neuson ET16 vs Caterpillar 301.6

A detailed comparison of the Wacker Neuson ET16 and the Caterpillar 301.6. Click a model name to view its full specifications.

Horsepower
Wacker Neuson ET1613 kW (17 HP)
Caterpillar 301.613 kW (17 HP)
Weight
Wacker Neuson ET161720 kg (3792 lbs)
Caterpillar 301.61770 kg (3902 lbs)
Operating Weight
Wacker Neuson ET161720 kg (3792 lbs)
Caterpillar 301.61770 kg (3902 lbs)
SpecificationWacker Neuson ET16Wacker Neuson ET16Mini ExcavatorsCaterpillar 301.6Caterpillar 301.6Mini Excavators
Excavator TypeMini ExcavatorMini Excavator
Weight1720 kg (3792 lbs)1770 kg (3902 lbs)
Horsepower13 kW (17 HP)13 kW (17 HP)
Digging Depth226 cm (89 in.)238 cm (94 in.)
Max Digging Depth226 cm (89 in.)238 cm (94 in.)
Max Loading Height237.7 cm (93.6 in.)—
Max Reach Along Ground365.8 cm (144.0 in.)—
Max Vertical Wall Digging Depth164.6 cm (64.8 in.)—
Overall Length365.8 cm (144.0 in.)—
Track Length4389.1 cm (1728.0 in.)—
Length of Track on Ground365.8 cm (144.0 in.)—
Ground Clearance18.3 cm (7.2 in.)—
Tail Swing Radius109.7 cm (43.2 in.)—
Overall Width100.6 cm (39.6 in.)—
Engine MakeYanmarCaterpillar
Engine Model3 TNV80F3003
Net Power13 kW (17 HP)13 kW (17 HP)
Gross Power13 kw (17.6 hp)13 kw (18.4 hp)
Rated Power2200 RPM—
Hydraulic Pump Flow Capacity30 LPM (8.7 GPM)—
Relief Valve Pressure200 Bar (2901 psi)—
Operating Weight1720 kg (3792 lbs)1770 kg (3902 lbs)
Max Travel Speed4.2 km (2.6 mph)4.3 km (2.7 mph)
Cab Height228.6 cm (90.0 in.)—
Cooling systemWater Cooled—
Fuel Capacity95.8 l (25.3 gal)—
Displacement1114.3 cc (68 cu. in.)966.8 cc (59 cu. in.)
Shoe Size22.9 cm (9.0 in.)—
No of Cylinders3—
Max Cutting Height341.4 cm (134.4 in.)—
Swing Speed—Machine 9.7 RPM
Blade Height—25 cm (10 in)
Blade Lift Height—20 cm (8 in.)
Stroke—7.6 cm (3.0 in)
Bore—7.6 cm (3.0 in)
Boom Swing(Left)—54 °
Boom Swing(Right)—50 °
Track Gauge—76.2 cm (30.0 in.)

Values come from the manufacturer-sourced model files; empty cells mean the property is not published for that model. No performance ranking is applied.

Other comparisons