Gasgoo Munich- China's new energy market is fiercely competitive. Companies are pouring capital into smart driving, cockpits, AI integration, and intelligent chassis... heavy investment is the norm across these core tracks. But in the last two years, a configuration usually overlooked has started appearing frequently at new car launches: the front trunk.
From the 400,000-yuan class NIO ES8 down to the 120,000-yuan class DEEPAL S05, electric vehicles across every price point are actively promoting their front trunk volume.
Take the recently launched ONVO L80, priced from 242,800 yuan. It boasts a 240-liter front trunk, claiming the title of "largest among currently sold models." The yet-to-be-launched BYD Tang, with its 252-liter volume, is similarly a focal point of its marketing. Leapmotor, DEEPAL, and other automakers also list this data clearly in their specification sheets.
According to incomplete statistics, over 30 mainstream new energy models now come equipped with a front trunk. Some have reached capacities of 200 liters—enough to hold two 20-inch carry-on bags plus a backpack or a case of mineral water.
Yet from a buyer's perspective, a storage compartment doesn't rank as high as core metrics like range, charging speed, or smart driving capabilities.
So why are automakers battling over this detail, and why is the fight getting fiercer? Is the front trunk simply about space design, or is there technical depth behind it? And what do owners actually think?
How the Front Trunk Arms Race Began
It starts with the industry's competitive landscape. Over the past decade, the battle lines in China's new energy market have shifted: early on, it was range and batteries; then smart driving and cockpits; followed by brake-by-wire and intelligent chassis; and now, AI integration. But today, the gap between automakers in these core areas is narrowing.
Automakers with in-house R&D—like Tesla, XPENG, and NIO—have achieved mass production of high-level driver assistance, even their own chips. Those lagging behind have tied their fortunes to top-tier suppliers like Huawei, Momenta, and Horizon Robotics. Both paths work. The result? Consumers are finding it harder to spot distinct differences in the intelligent experience between brands.
Zhu Jiangming, chairman of Leapmotor, told media outlets like Gasgoo that the competition in assisted driving algorithms is "becoming increasingly homogeneous." Ultimately, he argued, what sets companies apart is cost control and platform capability, not whose algorithms look flashier.
This judgment holds true for the wider industry. As competition over core technology flattens out, automakers naturally turn their attention to details that users can more easily perceive.
The front trunk fits this logic perfectly. It isn't new. When Tesla first entered China, it marketed the front trunk as a signature feature of pure electric vehicles. The 88-liter trunk in the Model 3, for instance, was initially a genuine eye-opener—after all, the front of an internal combustion engine car is packed with an engine and gearbox, leaving no such room.
This selling point set Tesla apart from gasoline-powered rivals, creating a competitive edge. Yet for years after, the front trunk didn't become an industry standard. Many domestic pure electric models offered relatively small ones; the first-generation XPeng P7 had just 66 liters, and its facelift even swapped it out for a heat pump air conditioner.
Promoting the front trunk back then wasn't just about practical storage; it was more about establishing a distinction from fuel cars. Much like hidden door handles, it was a hook to attract tech-savvy early adopters to new energy brands.
Image source: NIO
The turning point came in the last year or two. As highly integrated e-drive systems advanced, front cabin space was further freed up. Front trunks evolved from "small cubbies" of a few dozen liters into "warehouses" of 100 to 200 liters. A trunk that easily swallows two 20-inch suitcases is a completely different value proposition from one that holds a few bottles of water. This quantitative shift led to a qualitative change, sparking the current scramble to secure this space.
Existing data shows no linear relationship between front trunk volume and price. The newly launched ONVO L60 leads current sales with a 240-liter trunk at a guide price of 242,800 yuan. Meanwhile, the similarly priced Xiaomi YU7 offers just 141 liters—less than the DEEPAL S05 (159 liters), which starts at 119,900 yuan.
The front trunk has migrated from an exclusive perk of high-end pure electric models into the mainstream price bracket, becoming a universal chip for automakers to vie for customers across all segments.
The logic behind this push is clear: first, no automaker wants to lose out on the spec sheet to a direct rival. Second, the front trunk is inherently a differentiator against internal combustion engine vehicles—and replacing those cars is the primary goal for new energy automakers right now.
However, Zhang Hong, an expert committee member at the China Automobile Dealers Association, believes the front trunk will have limited impact on fuel vehicle sales. While fuel cars struggle to offer large front trunks, they still hold advantages in range and heavy-load long-distance travel. New energy vehicles boosting competitiveness with features like the front trunk might indirectly erode fuel car sales, but that is more a result of overall market growth than any single factor.
Behind the Scenes: The Power of "Three Electrics" Integration
Looking only at the spec sheet numbers, you might think a front trunk is just a hole cut in the nose of the car. In reality, it is the "space" that remains after stuffing in a pile of components.
There is a common misconception: since rear-drive pure electric vehicles don't place a drive motor up front, the front cabin should be mostly empty, yielding a massive front trunk.
Reality is different. The front cabin is still packed with the electronic control unit, high-voltage wiring harnesses, air conditioning compressors, brake boost pumps, and the 12-volt battery. Take the 12-volt battery: it is often tucked in a recess at the bottom of the front trunk. If positioned poorly, the interior becomes stepped, losing a dozen liters of usable volume out of thin air.
Zhang Hong points out that front trunk volume is closely tied to the integration level of the "Three Electrics" (battery, motor, and control). Pure electric vehicles may have eliminated the engine and gearbox, but if the ECU, high-voltage harnesses, cooling pipes, and air conditioning systems are poorly laid out, a large front trunk is still difficult to achieve.
Image source: NIO
Thermal management is the hardest obstacle to navigate. Heat pump air conditioners consume vertical space; without flattening, the trunk ends up shallow. Coolant tanks, radiator fans, and pipe joints might be small individually, but when seven or eight are scattered across the front cabin with pipes running every which way, the space gets eaten away.
"Three Electrics" integration is a testament to an automaker's technical strength. The key to boosting integration lies in adopting highly integrated e-drive assemblies—some manufacturers have moved to 12-in-1 solutions—compressing what were once scattered parts into a smaller footprint. Simultaneously, lightweight high-voltage harnesses and flattened thermal management modules are crucial for freeing up front cabin space.
NIO's ETMS 3.0 full-domain thermal management system, used in its models, systematically integrates multiple components, cutting down on independent pipes, joints, and water pumps. Official data shows the overall volume is roughly 40% smaller than the previous generation—a key technical prerequisite enabling the ONVO L90 to achieve its 240-liter front trunk.
Advances in battery technology are also fueling this trend. Highly integrated battery packs like BYD's CTB (Cell-to-Body) Blade Battery reduce overall thickness, leaving more vertical room in the front cabin layout. This allows engineers to design a lower, flatter front trunk floor, improving accessibility and space utilization.
Image source: Leapmotor
This explains why the BYD Tang (pre-sale model) boasts a 252-liter front trunk. A combination of chassis layout and high "Three Electrics" integration has liberated that front cabin space.
But bigger isn't always better. The front cabin is a primary energy-absorption zone during a collision. The front axle collision structure must retain enough crumple space, and high-voltage harnesses need flexibility and protection to prevent short circuits upon impact.
This means the engineering boundary of a front trunk is predicated on safety. ONVO's approach with the L90 involves using a material mix of high-strength steel and aluminum alloy exceeding 92% in the front cabin, along with a 2,000 MPa crossbeam to optimize crash energy absorption. This maximizes trunk space while ensuring safety standards are met.
The size of a front trunk serves as a side-check on an automaker's "Three Electrics" integration capability. If two pure electric cars have front trunks that differ in size by a factor of two, the difference isn't just the vehicle dimensions—it's the level of engineering design in the entire front cabin.
Of course, volume numbers are just the starting point. Making it truly useful relies on design details.
Models supporting power opening and closing, or kick sensors, let you operate the hood without touching it. But some support power open only, requiring a manual close; others demand pulling a latch twice inside the car before getting out to manually shut it—drastically reducing convenience. Opening angle is also critical: SUVs have hoods that sit high. If the opening is small but the trunk deep, shorter owners have to tiptoe and stoop to reach items. These details decide the final mile between "having a frunk" and "having a usable frunk."
Gimmick or Necessity?
All technology development ultimately aims for market adoption. So in actual use, how do users perceive the value of a front trunk?
Gasgoo analyzed over 400 real user comments on Xiaohongshu. 81% of users believe a front trunk is necessary, while only 19% see it as unnecessary.
Image source: Xiaohongshu
Supporters cited specific scenarios: fresh seafood goes in the front trunk for better sealing and no odor mixing; light but bulky items like tents and picnic mats fit perfectly there, saving space in the main trunk.
Some Tesla owners use the space for charging gear and gym clothes for easy access. Because the Model Y's front trunk is square and includes a drain, some even use it to store their fishing catch. One parent turns it into a temporary diaper changing table, noting that the flat floor and enclosed space offer practicality beyond expectations.
This shows that in outdoor scenarios, the front trunk provides a zoning logic the main trunk can't replace: separation of wet and dry items, odor isolation, and easy access. In the past, these needs were barely managed by trunk liners and storage boxes.
Usage frequency is rising for some models. William Li, NIO's chairman and CEO, recently mentioned that ONVO L90 users access their front trunk more often than the rear one. When a product is large enough and useful enough, habits shift.
Of course, skepticism remains. Some users report that certain models have tiny front trunks with low utility—"you have to tilt a 20-inch carry-on just to squeeze it in."
The opening and closing experience is a pain point. Some models require manual effort to close or are difficult to operate with one hand. Safety issues have also arisen: several owners have posted about getting pinched while pressing the hood shut after accidentally triggering it via voice command, lacking anti-pinch protection. Others report alarms suddenly going off while driving because the system falsely detected an open trunk, requiring multiple trips to service to fix.
Furthermore, proximity to the motor means the front trunk gets hot while driving. Temperature-sensitive items—fresh food, medicine, chocolate, drinks—aren't suitable for long-term storage there. This is a physical constraint, not a design flaw, yet automakers rarely mention it, sometimes even boasting that the trunk "can hold live fish."
Zhang Hong notes that some automakers overemphasize volume as a marketing highlight, but in practice, issues like irregular shapes, poor opening design, and difficult access can lead to a situation where "it's big, but it's not useful."
More concerning is that a few manufacturers might compromise on crash energy absorption to chase volume. This recalls the previous over-marketing of smart driving features. Back then, many companies packaged assisted driving as autonomous driving, sparking a crisis of trust and safety. Some drivers, over-relying on these systems, took their hands off the wheel, leading to accidents.
Image source: NIO
Zhang Hong's overall assessment is this: for users who frequently travel long distances, enjoy outdoor sports, or need significant storage space, front trunk volume could be a key purchasing factor.
But for most consumers, range, charging convenience, interior comfort, and safety remain the core metrics. The front trunk is, at best, icing on the cake—not a key variable in the decision-making process, unless it aligns perfectly with specific user needs.
The popularity of the front trunk is a microcosm of the Chinese new energy market entering its "deep water" phase. As core dimensions like smart driving, cockpits, power, and range converge, automakers are seeking differentiation in spatial details, usage scenarios, and experiential perception. This isn't a bad thing—it signals an industry moving from the stage of "having it" to "using it well."
Yet, when a feature is over-marketed, its true value can be obscured. That front trunks have reached this level of competition is essentially the spillover of "Three Electrics" progress—which is positive. But if automakers focus solely on volume rankings and use gimmicks like "raising fish" or "seating people" to create hype, they ultimately drain user trust. The lessons from the smart driving hype a few years ago are not far off.
For consumers, the front trunk remains a bonus feature, not a purchasing prerequisite. What truly deserves attention is the comprehensive balance a vehicle strikes between safety, energy consumption, reliability, space, and intelligence. For automakers, harder than building a large front trunk is honestly telling users what it's suitable for, what it isn't, and when it's convenient versus when it's not worth forcing.
Technological progress should ultimately serve real human needs, not rankings on a specification sheet. When the industry stops competing over who has the bigger numbers and starts competing over who understands users' lives better, that will be the true sign of having "figured out the game."
