Under $25,000 SUVs with the Most Cargo Space

When you’re purchasing a vehicle, you want a lot of bang for your buck. That’s a big reason why the SUV class has continued to see an uptick in sales.

SUVs provide drivers with more passenger room and cargo space than cars with little compromise in terms of price and fuel economy. However, if you only have $25,000 to spend, you also want to get a lot of value.

In this article, we’re going to examine the cargo room of vehicles in the subcompact class with the seats folded down to determine which models come out on top but still come in at less than $25,000 in cost. So let’s get right to it…

Which Subcompact SUVs Have the Most Cargo Space?

rogue sport

1. Nissan Rogue Sport: 61.1 cubic feet

The Rogue Sport, not be confused with the larger Rogue, has a class-leading 61.1 cubic ft of cargo volume. The model is basically a ¾ version of the Rogue with a less powerful engine. And it isn’t very fuel efficient in the subcompact class.

2. Honda HR-V: 58.8 cubic feet


Honda’s smallest crossover offering doesn’t scrimp on room with near class-leading cargo space. It’s also a fuel-efficient model with good handling and a solid interior finish.

One drawback to consider is its 141 horsepower engine isn’t near the top of the class.

2013 subaru xv crosstrek

3. Subaru Crosstrek: 55.3 cubic feet

The Crosstrek is a good value with near class leading engine power, standard all-wheel drive, and relatively spacious cargo room. It also has higher ground clearance, which is a plus if you ever encounter deep snow or tackle unpaved roads. The Crosstrek also offers a more expensive plug-in hybrid version to choose from.

However, because the Crosstrek is heavier than models that don’t have all-wheel drive, and with a transmission that isn’t geared for fun, it’s engine performance can be seen as a drawback.

4. Nissan Kicks: 53.1 cubic feet

The Kicks takes the place of the sporty and more powerful Juke in the Nissan SUV lineup. The Juke was an early subcompact crossover offered that emphasized a sporty look and swooping lines, with little in the way of cargo room.

However, folded rear seats in the Kicks do not sit evenly on the cargo floor, making it troublesome to load longer and taller objects. Also, the Kicks does not currently offer an all-wheel-drive variant.

5. Jeep Renegade: 50.8 cubic feet

Jeep’s boxy subcompact offering is a good fit if you want more off-road capability, and want room for your gear. It does offer a much less spacious 18.5 cubic feet of cargo room with the rear seats up.

6. Ford EcoSport: 50.0 cubic feet

While competitive on cargo space, the EcoSport emphasizes eco with its standard three-cylinder turbocharged engine. This means lethargic acceleration. The EcoSport is also not as rich in standard safety features as its competitors.

ford ecosport

Other Spacious Subcompact Crossover Models

Subcompact SUV models that just missed the cut in terms of cargo room are the Mitsubishi Outlander Sport and Chevrolet Trax. If your budget allows up to a $30,000 price, the Buick Encore is also in this smaller range of cargo space.

Another model to consider if you don’t need all-wheel-drive is the Kia Soul. It’s a subcompact crossover competitor that only comes as front-wheel-drive but offers an impressive 60 cubic feet of cargo space.

If efficiency is what you want, consider the front-wheel drive only Kia Niro, a plug-in hybrid model, and it’s 54.5 cubic feet of cargo room, but with a price tag closer to $35,000.

Also just because a vehicle has the most space, doesn’t mean it’s going to best meet a driver’s needs. There are also other important factors to consider such as ride quality, passenger space, and fuel efficiency.

What is your favorite subcompact SUV with cargo space?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Leave a Comment





Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.