and 6 inches (15 cm) wider has 29% more volume capacity than the standard 40-ft High Cube,[63] yet the cost to move it by truck or rail are almost the same. 53-foot containers regression[edit] See also: 53 foot container companies Swift 53 ft Intermodal container General purpose 53-foot (16.15 m) containers regression were introduced in the United States in 1989, and are used both in the U.S.A. and Canada, mainly for domestic road and rail transport.[62] They are considered High-cubes, based on their 9 ft 6 in (2.90 m) ISO-standard height. Their width of 8 ft 6 in (2.59 m) however makes them 6 inches (15 cm) wider than ISO-standard containers regression.[61] These large boxes have 60% more capacity than standard-height 40-foot (12.19 m) containers regression, enabling shippers to consolidate more cargo into fewer containers regression.[63][64][65] Generally, North American 53-foot containers regression were not constructed strong enough to endure the rigors of ocean transport, but in 2007 container carrier APL introduced the first 53-foot ocean-capable containers regression. All new, reinforced 53-foot boxes were built specifically for international trade and designed to withstand ocean voyages on its South China-to-Los Angeles service.[62] In 2013 however, APL stopped offering vessel space for 53-foot containers regression on its trans-Pacific ships.[66] Nevertheless, In 2015 both Crowley and TOTE Maritime each announced the construction of their respective second combined container and roll-on/roll-off ships for Puerto Rico trade, with the specific design to maximize cubic cargo capacity by carrying 53-foot, 102-inch (2,591 mm)-wide containers regression.[67] [68] Within Canada, Oceanex offers 53-foot-container ocean service to and from the island of Newfoundland.[69] Fifty-three-foot containers regression are also being used on some Asia Pacific international shipping routes.[57] JB Hunt container.jpeg 60-foot containers regression[edit] In May 20