The sad thing is an original Isigonis style 1980s mini estate gives more chance to put a full size dog in the back, with the rear seats up, than the current massive Mini Clubman estate that's cramped for a Yorkie with the back doors closed. It really is comical seeing original Mini and new next to each other -- the new one is not, by any stretch, "mini".<p>I keep thinking my retirement project should be an EV 1980 mini estate with upmarket seats and instruments -- as that's honestly what I want to buy in an EV. Something starting that light should have lots of range and performance scope...
I was in San Francisco last week, and the car rental agency "upgraded" me from the compact I had requested to a full size SUV.<p>Fortunately we weren't staying in the city, but that thing was definitely no fun headed up Hwy 1...<p>I regularly drive ambulances and fire trucks, so I'm used to "aggressively" driving large vehicles, but that was a whole new level of stressful. California either needs wider roads, or to mandate narrower cars (it seems to have worked well enough for emissions...)
A recent trip to Europe and the cars, trucks, highways, roads, etc.. everything feels smaller. Parking garages are the worst, so narrow you can barely see if you're going to scrape a wall or car. You really have to use the force.
I wonder how much of this is due to safety, and if size expansion is due to safety, whether it’s a matter of trying to be in a bigger car than the other guy. Is there an ideal car size or will cars grow forever?
I was going to bring up the Mazda MX-5 as an example of a car that shrunk in its latest generation, only to find out that the current model is the widest by a whole centimetre.
The layout of these cars also plays an important role. Sedans have been getting bigger because the internal space is wasted in every possible way and manufacturers have been struggling to sell the smaller ones given how useless they are. That market segment has been completely dominated by the new generation of small hatchbacks like the Honda Fit/Scion XD/Toyota Yaris etc.
My RV is 102 inches wide not including the mirrors. Apparently that's the max allowed federally by the US although technically in some states it may not be on smaller roads and might be the old standard of 96" though never heard of that being enforced. Most Semis and box trucks are 102" wide.<p>I believe the max allowed length is 65 feet, my RV is 32ft plus I tow a jeep, probably close to 50ft total. Height is under 13 ft.<p>Interstate driving is no problem it gets pretty interesting driving around in the city, but surprising where you can fit it. Both the width and height cause the most issues.<p>Normal cars and trucks still have room to grow within the federal limits, I don't believe any are 102" wide, full size dual rear wheel pickups are only 96" and the Ford Raptor is 86" and a Lambo is 80".<p>Driving my RV feels like driving a room down the road, there is about 3 feet between me and passenger.
There is some interesting related research being done by the DLR (German Space Agency). They have developed a low-weight chassis for small light-weight vehicles (the european L7e vehicle class, i.e. up to 450kg (1000lbs) without battery) that achieves good crash test results: <a href="https://www.spotlightmetal.com/dlr-tests-ultra-light-commuter-car-a-765541/" rel="nofollow">https://www.spotlightmetal.com/dlr-tests-ultra-light-commute...</a><p>Just switching to electric cars will not save the planets resources. We have to use less resources by using smaller, lighter vehicles instead of heavy SUVs.
I reckon small cars pose less risk to others. Pedestrians and cyclists can easily see over them. Stopping distances are probably better. Ending up on the hood/bonnet of a small vehicle rather than under a large one with it's very high front end (often with an attached bullbar) is almost certainly preferable. Finally, consider that large vehicles likely do much more damage to other vehicles in a crash.<p>All in all I find ownership of a large vehicle to be a fair proxy for an inconsiderate personality (bear in mind, I don't live in the US where large vehicles seem to be the defacto choice).
Center consoles used to be seen only on large trucks. Now most cars have them. That's width not used by the occupants. Even the Tesla Model 3 has a huge center console, despite not having a driveshaft to hide.
Cars keep getting heavier too. With electric cars and energy use it would be good if there was a weight limit. It is normally safer in a collision if you sit in a heavier car. But this length and weight race make cars heavier.<p>I guess one factor is car test where they measure trunk capacity in liters/ back seat leg room. Cars with more space usually get better reviews.<p>For global warming we need ultra light cars which are energy efficient or no cars at all bikes.
the article doesn't make sense<p>the Golf was essentially replaced by Polo nowadays. people are getting richer so obviously the well known models are also getting bigger and fancier than they were in past and if you want comparable model with the one from past you must go one class lower<p>same thing applies with phones and display size/specs, it's the easiest way to show customer the progress by offering him bigger display, sadly with smartphones you don't really have small options anymore like with cars where you just choose appropriate model
Is this really a modern trend, or just cherry picked data? This article needs a more thorough statistical analysis of car width through time.<p>I'm hesitant to take it at face value because, for example, to my knowledge the classic American land barges of the 60s and 70s (many of which are quite beautiful in an aggressive, almost obnoxious way) were quite wide - a 1969 Dodge charger is just a couple inches narrower than a 1990 Ford F150/Bronco, for example.