Are cars getting too big for the road? Deep dive on ‘carspreading’, SUVs and road safety
We explore why cars are getting bigger and heavier, plus the effect this has on motorists and other road users
Sixty years ago, the most popular car in the UK was the Austin/Morris 1100: a small family model that measured roughly 3.7 metres long, 1.6 metres wide and weighed around 830kg. Today, the UK’s best-seller is the Ford Puma SUV: once again a small family car, but measuring 4.2 metres long, 1.8 metres wide and weighing in at a comparatively portly 1,300kg – and even more in fully electric Puma Gen-E guise.
The recent expansion of cars’ size and weight – often referred to as ‘carspreading’ – has become a contentious topic in recent years, with many questioning whether we’ve prioritised kerb appeal above the likes of safety and the environment.
As a case study of how much cars have grown over the past six decades, we brought together a lovingly restored original Fiat 600 hatchback and the new Fiat 600e, both small family models in their respective era, despite the newer EV’s fashionable SUV form. However, as we slowly found out, today’s definition of a ‘small’ car varies wildly from that of 60 years ago.
Fancy downsizing to a smaller car? There are loads of choices available through our Buy A Car service, and many have huge discounts.
Why are cars getting bigger?
To understand whether larger cars do have a tangible impact – and to what extent – it helps to first look at how we got here. There’s a multitude of reasons why cars have gradually grown in size, yet the biggest influences can be summed up by what we’ll refer to as the three Ps: ‘Protection’, ‘Pride’ and ‘Profitability’.
We’ll come back to the first ‘P’ in a moment because it’s important to highlight how the other two feed into one another. For years, large 4x4s were typically viewed as work vehicles and not typically a symbol of status. This changed in 1970 with the introduction of the original Range Rover; boasting incredible luxury and uncompromising off-road capability, the British icon kickstarted the idea that cars of this kind could be desirable.
In the decades that followed, other luxury car makers such as Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, Audi and Porsche hopped on the luxury SUV bandwagon. Although a few cheaper options such as the Mitsubishi Shogun and original Vauxhall Frontera were launched, too, most SUVs offered were restricted to the upper end of the market.
This changed with the arrival of the Nissan Qashqai in 2006. Compact SUVs such as this had existed before in the form of things like the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4, but the Qashqai offered an enticing blend of stylish looks and tall ride height with the affordability of a family hatchback. This proved a winning blend that captured the public’s attention and since then we’ve barely looked back.
While SUVs certainly play to our own vanity, they also expand the pockets of the firms that make them. While most two-wheel-drive SUVs are comparable in terms of fuel economy to an equivalent hatchback – and much less thirsty than an average 4x4 – manufacturers can charge a lot more for the status they provide.
For example, the Ford Puma exists somewhat as the spiritual successor to the recently discontinued Ford Fiesta on which it’s based. They offer similar levels of space, although higher seats on the Puma create the illusion of a much taller car, but the Puma was priced, before the Fiesta’s demise, at roughly 10-15 per cent more than its supermini sibling.
Brands can do this because the industry has also curated a narrative of larger cars offering greater ‘Protection’ for occupants. This, for the most part, seems to be the case; Department for Transport data for the past two decades – which have coincided with the phenomenal rise of the SUV – shows that the number of car occupant casualties dropped from 183,858 in 2004 to just 70,089 in 2024. Car occupants today account for just 54 per cent of road collision casualties, down from 65.5 per cent 20 years ago.
This is largely due to safety innovations such as curtain airbags and crumple zones becoming a key part of car design. Manufacturers must incorporate these in order to comply with increasingly stringent regulations, with all passenger car proportions – not just SUVs’ – expanding to accommodate them.
Fiat’s UK head of product, Pietro Orsatti, told Auto Express: “Vehicle design is heavily influenced by customer needs and expectations, although safety regulations and advances in technology are also important factors; driver, passenger and pedestrian safety is always a key priority in Fiat vehicle designs. The Fiat 600 meets all current European pedestrian protection standards and incorporates a full suite of technologies.”
So, bringing in our two Fiats, we measured them and found that, bar rear headroom, the interior passenger space was very similar between the two cars. Boot space on the 600e was much greater, thanks in part to how much longer the model is, but the difference in thickness between the two cars’ doors is staggering. This results in the 600e being a much wider car than the old 600, despite not feeling all that much more spacious.
It’s worth noting that SUV design and passenger safety aren’t exclusive to one another; while physics will always dictate that the occupants of a larger car are more protected than those in a small one, the design of impact zones and safety features will have a more significant impact on safety.
Are SUVs more dangerous?
Although the figures point to the fact that a larger car is safer for occupants, there is also evidence that suggests larger vehicles with high bonnet lines could be more dangerous for vulnerable road users such as cyclists and pedestrians.
A recent study by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and Imperial College London analysed more than 680,000 accidents from across the past 35 years and found that a pedestrian or cyclist is 44 per cent more likely to be fatally injured if hit by an SUV compared with a ‘regular’ car. This jumps to 82 per cent for children.
The key problem isn’t necessarily a vehicle’s weight – although in a car-to-car impact that is certainly an aggravating factor – it’s the high bonnet line that’s a common SUV design. This, combined with a blunt front end, is more likely to impact vital organs and to push whoever is hit forward into the road and under the vehicle, rather than a comparatively safer route up and over the bonnet.
Research from European environmental federation ‘Transport & Environment’ (T&E) found that the height of the average car bonnet in the EU, UK and Norway has risen from 76.9cm in 2010 to 83.8cm in 2024. T&E called out Jaguar Land Rover because all its models have bonnet heights that exceed one metre, requesting that the EU (and by proxy the UK, because we tend to follow European automotive legislation) cap bonnet heights at 83cm from 2035.
Reacting to T&E’s observations, a spokesperson for the manufacturer told Auto Express: “JLR continually invests in safety and advanced technology features – which, amongst other things, include pedestrian detection, 3D surround camera systems, and autonomous emergency braking. We are committed to the highest safety standards and our vehicles are made with the strictest adherence to safety requirements."
Of course, SUVs are an obvious target, but it’s worth pointing out that the term is now used to describe everything from small crossovers to large 4x4s. Many so-called SUVs are really slightly raised hatchbacks with a smattering of plastic body cladding in order to give the impression of a real off-roader. The Puma is only around 7.5cm taller than a Fiesta and 20cm shorter in height than the Kuga family SUV, which is significantly smaller than some of the largest SUVs on sale. The same goes for the Fiat 600e which, while much bigger than the old 600, is nowhere near comparable in size to something like a Range Rover.
But while many are realising the potential negative impact of large cars and SUVs on pedestrians, the idea still persists that they provide enhanced safety for occupants. The UK head of the Clean Cities Campaign and part of the anti-4x4 and carspreading ‘SUV Alliance’, Oliver Lord, said: “This is a trend that’s not helping anyone and you end up getting stuck in that cycle where everyone thinks they need the bigger car to be the safest on the road. Then we're caught up in this arms race, but the irony is you can’t then see the kids in front of you because the bonnet’s so high, and then everyone else is much less safe.”
It’s worth pointing out that, according to T&E, electric SUVs tend to have a bonnet height that’s 2.3cm lower than the market average. This is likely due to the fact that a lower bonnet line is more aerodynamic than a blunter one – thus helping improve range – plus the fact that you don’t need to house an actual engine in the front.
Are SUVs bad for the environment?
Nevertheless, while EVs are touted as the better fuel option for the environment, there is a concern that SUVs – electric or internal combustion – are fundamentally bad for the environment. Lord points out that “big, heavy cars are less energy efficient than small, light ones” and that they “require more minerals to build them in the first place”.
Bigger cars thus require a more powerful, typically thirstier powertrain, so historically it’s been the case that the largest vehicles are the most expensive to run – both in the case of your wallet and the planet. But with the rise of EVs, things get a bit more complicated. To cover longer journeys an EV needs a large battery, which can have significant weight implications; a Tesla Model Y Long Range’s battery, for example, weighs around 770kg – just over a third of the car’s total weight.
The SUV Alliance accepts this fact, with Lord explaining how “you want the electric car to be as efficient as possible, but if it’s a big one, it’s going to be less aerodynamic. It’s then going to need an even bigger battery to power it and you end up with environmental implications”.
Many environmental campaigners have called on cities to mirror the French government’s so-called ‘SUV Tax’, which aims to disincentivise the purchase of large, heavy vehicles. It currently applies to cars weighing more than 1,600kg, with the tax in steps per kilogram over the threshold.
While EVs, including electric SUVs, are currently exempt from this sort of taxation, studies suggest that UK car buyers pay 20 per cent less tax on heavy vehicles than other European countries, and groups such as the SUV Alliance say more needs to be done, while also respecting the inherent bulk of EVs.
T&E, for example, proposes a tax system that all cars over 1,600kg should be charged £10 per kilo over the limit for their first year of VED, with electric cars benefiting from a higher 2,000kg limit.
“The correlation between the size and the weight of the car is very good, but that correlation starts to not be as strong when it comes to electric,” Lord said. “At the end of the day there are still going to be electric cars that are a reasonable size and offer a good range. Then there’s the big electric SUVs that can do the same range… this trend helps neither safety nor the environment.”
It’s not just the environment that large SUVs are accused of damaging, because they, as well as EVs of all sizes, have been accused of being too heavy and unsuitable.Many people are concerned that the added weight of a battery, or the bulk of an SUV’s body could damage the structural integrity of not only our roads, but also things like multi-storey car parks.
The British Parking Association’s (BPA) Isaac Occhipinti told us: “While EVs are typically heavier than their petrol or diesel equivalents, multi-storey car parks in the UK are generally designed and built to comply with national building regulations and relevant structural design codes, which already include allowances for vehicle weight and load distribution. At present, there is no evidence to suggest that multi-storey car parks built to these standards are unable to accommodate EVs.”
That said, the BPA’s chief technical services officer has previously told The Guardian newspaper that “older car parks may present some initial risks that need to be addressed – not that can’t be addressed but that need to be addressed”.
So what about roads?
According to the Asphalt Industry Alliance (AIA), fears may be somewhat overblown. David Giles, the AIA’s chairperson, said: “We ask a lot from our ageing roads, from rising traffic volumes, to dealing with a wide range of temperatures and weather conditions, all of which can negatively impact road conditions. And, while most principal roads are designed to deal with current HGV weights, this is not the case with unclassified roads – which make up the majority of the network.
“While the increasing number of SUVs and electric vehicles should not impact structurally on main roads, which are well constructed, there may be more of an impact on the rest of the local road network. Here, existing weaknesses and loss of resilience, such as those indicated by potholes, could be worsened by rising traffic volumes and changing weather patterns, as well as by an increase in average vehicle weights.”
Instead, the AIA places the blame of road deterioration firmly on the Government, claiming “our view is that it’s principally the lack of investment in highways maintenance over many decades that is responsible for the continuing deterioration of our local roads.”
Weight aside, there is also the issue of size, which is more than evident. Take parking, for example: we parked both the Fiat 600 and 600e in a standard 2.4 metre-wide bay next to a large SUV.
The experience getting in and out of each was vastly different, and that couldn’t simply be attributed to the old car’s rear-hinged doors. The original 600, for starters, is 40cm narrower than the new electric model and this is most apparent in tight car parking spaces; entering and exiting the 600 was no problem, while I had to really squeeze myself out of the 600e, holding the door to avoid hitting the car in the next bay.
And I must stress, the Fiat 600e is classed as a ‘small SUV’, meaning the problem of tight car parks gets more severe for larger 4x4s. Such is the case that the Institution of Structural Engineers has recommended those building new car parks should specify a minimum bay width of 2.6 metres, although this will still be relatively tight for the biggest SUVs.
Driving around in an older car, such as the 600, also reveals how much vehicles have grown; even a standard Fiat 500 from the past few years feels comparatively huge when you’re driving a small model from the sixties. Of course, the benefit here is that a smaller car feels much more suited to the UK’s old, narrow streets, enabling you to drive around with confidence without needing modern aids such as 360-degree cameras.
Having said that, spend only a few seconds driving side-by-side with a huge lorry and you’ll quickly realise how vulnerable you feel in something of the original 600’s size. Getting behind the wheel of the 600 doesn’t only involve getting past the lack of seatbelts, but also offering up your own body as a crumple zone; there are no airbags, either.
With this in mind, Fiat is adamant that it has struck the right balance in terms of size when it comes to the new 600e. “While the original Fiat 600 was iconic for its size, today’s vehicles are required to meet modern safety standards and the comfort and technology expectations of today’s customers,” Orsatti told us. “The new Fiat 600 is a good example of this approach, offering optimal space and practicality, whilst maintaining a compact footprint that is suitable for urban use but also with capability for longer journeys. In this context, the new 600 is a perfect size rather than too big.”
Are SUVs the future?
So, if SUVs are too large for our roads and parking spaces, less economical than regular cars and potentially more dangerous to pedestrians, why do we continue to buy them?
That’s a question asked by some climate campaigners, who have recently taken it upon themselves to vandalise SUV owners’ cars; one group, known as the Tyre Extinguishers, hit the headlines a couple of years ago for letting down people’s tyres.
On behalf of the SUV Alliance, Lord says: “We don’t advocate for that level of direct action because you get to the point where you’re kind of vilifying that individual, who might not have even known about these issues and the concerns. Give them an opportunity to respond and actually have a conversation.”
Yet, while SUVs are certainly the present – they accounted for one third of new-car sales in 2024 – they might not necessarily be the future. Manufacturers are typically planning model line-ups five-to-10 years in advance, meaning most new cars on the near horizon will likely be SUVs and crossovers. However, it’s possible that buyer tastes and perceptions might slowly begin to shift away from SUVs – particularly as some of the issues listed above get talked about more and more – with brands having to therefore react and build the vehicles customers want.
While Long was quick to refer to estate cars as an alternative to SUVs, a senior Peugeot product executive recently told Auto Express that “younger people like hatchbacks because they see SUVs as the cars of their parents, so it could come full circle”.
Regardless, it’s clear that while all SUVs can easily be tarred with the same brush, meaning small models are unfairly put into the same group as larger ones, there are several valid concerns, whether that be in regards to safety or the environment. With manufacturers bleeding cash in the switch to EVs and thus leaning on the extra revenue provided by SUVs, it then relies on Government intervention to ensure we keep both ourselves and the planet safe.
Did you know you can sell your car through Auto Express? We’ll help you get a great price and find a great deal on a new car, too.
Find a car with the experts
