Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB - View Single Post - (GR86) Second Generation FR-S/BRZ insider info...

Tcoat · 02-01-2020, 01:55 AM

Let's talk about "platforms" and "architecture" for a bit since there seem to be some misconceptions in what the terms mean.

A vehicle "platform" is not a fixed size or shape chassis that they make the parts fit around. The terms are used in a more abstract way than an actual physical structure. Think of it more a a standard set of lego that you can use the same parts but make larger or smaller final versions of by using more or less of the available pieces. It uses the same design and basic set up but can be rather different from one vehicle to another. The 17+ compact car Impreza and the huge bloody Ascent are built on the same "platform" but the actual structure is very different for each vehicle. The same applies for Toyota and their "architecture".

Subaru has been very clear that they have gone with a platform that can accommodate their current and future line up for possible Kei/sub compact cars to full sized SUVs. They have also stated they can use the same platform for hybrid and EVs.

So... If both manufactures can use the same platform for any and all models why do people all of a sudden think that they can't use one or the other "because the engine won't fit between the frame rails" or "Subaru's new platform can't handle RWD"? They literally can adjust those platforms for anything.

If they decided to go with the Toyota architecture it would be more for economy of scale cost reasons not because parts won't fit in the Subaru one.

02-01-2020, 01:55 AM	#253
Tcoat Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Drives: 2020 Hakone Location: London, Ont Posts: 69,845 Thanks: 61,656 Thanked 108,283 Times in 46,456 Posts Mentioned: 2495 Post(s) Tagged: 50 Thread(s)	Let's talk about "platforms" and "architecture" for a bit since there seem to be some misconceptions in what the terms mean. A vehicle "platform" is not a fixed size or shape chassis that they make the parts fit around. The terms are used in a more abstract way than an actual physical structure. Think of it more a a standard set of lego that you can use the same parts but make larger or smaller final versions of by using more or less of the available pieces. It uses the same design and basic set up but can be rather different from one vehicle to another. The 17+ compact car Impreza and the huge bloody Ascent are built on the same "platform" but the actual structure is very different for each vehicle. The same applies for Toyota and their "architecture". Subaru has been very clear that they have gone with a platform that can accommodate their current and future line up for possible Kei/sub compact cars to full sized SUVs. They have also stated they can use the same platform for hybrid and EVs. So... If both manufactures can use the same platform for any and all models why do people all of a sudden think that they can't use one or the other "because the engine won't fit between the frame rails" or "Subaru's new platform can't handle RWD"? They literally can adjust those platforms for anything. If they decided to go with the Toyota architecture it would be more for economy of scale cost reasons not because parts won't fit in the Subaru one. __________________ Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar, because Racecar.