The surprising cars that are related to each other

They look nothing alike, they weren’t manufactured under the same roof and they’re aimed at a completely different target audience. Finding the answer requires peeling off the body: Both are made on the same basic architecture. You can also find it by peeking under a third-generation Ford Mondeo, among other models.

Platform-sharing is common in the automotive industry. Companies offset the increasingly high cost of developing a car by spreading their investment across several brands, including some they don’t own or normally do business with. Join us for a look at the surprising cars that were separated at birth:

Sharing a platform in the 21^st century isn’t as simple as it was in the 1960s, when companies could simply unbolt a body from a frame and replace it with something else. Many vehicles built on a common architecture use a different floorpan but share parts like subframes, suspension components, steering assemblies, electrical systems and safety technology. And, note we’re not aiming to lambast automakers for sharing parts; it’s a strategy that more often than not makes sense. We’re highlighting how flexible modern automotive technology has become. PICTURE: Volkswagen MQB platform

Audi built the original TT on the same platform as the A3 in order to keep costs in check; the idea was never to create an eye-wateringly expensive supercar. The company renewed its commitment to this strategy by building the second-generation model on the same PQ35 platform as the then-current A3, among other models sold by the Volkswagen Group. Engineers went to significant lengths to make the architecture more flexible than its predecessor, PQ34, so the TT didn’t drive like a Jetta or a Golf.

The final interpretation of Volkswagen’s emblematic rear-engined Beetle was one of the last cars built on the PQ35 platform. Stylists took advantage of the new bones to make it longer, lower, wider and more spacious than the New Beetle it replaced. Reports claimed its replacement would switch to the MQB platform but Volkswagen confirmed it’s not planning to release another Beetle in the near future. If there’s ever one, it will likely arrive on the electric car-only MEB found under the ID.3.

The tenth and final generation of the Chevrolet Impala was the last car launched on the Epsilon II architecture General Motors began rolling out across its portfolio in 2008. Opel led the platform’s development and its engineers designed two basic variants for short and long cars, respectively. The last Impala was one of the four cars built on the long-wheelbase version of Epsilon II.

The Epsilon II platform was very much an Opel design so it’s not surprising to find it under the Insignia, its largest model. Vauxhall’s variant of the car is evidently built on these same bones, as are the Buick Regal and the ZB-generation Holden Commodore. They’re built on the shorter version of Epsilon II.

Desperate to save money, Saab built the second-generation 9-5 on the long version of the Epsilon II platform, meaning it shared its basic underpinnings with the Buick LaCrosse, the aforementioned Chevrolet Impala, and the Cadillac XTS. The common roots were quickly reported by members of the media after the car’s 2009 introduction so Saab clarified about 70% of the parts used to build the 9-5 (including the available all-wheel drive system) were brand-specific.

Developed to replace the Maverick, the Ford Fairmont inaugurated the Fox platform developed during the 1970s to underpin a wide range of models. Though not one of Ford’s best-sellers, the now-forgotten Fairmont spawned a Mercury named Zephyr and, oddly, a pickup called Durango developed with Los Angeles-based National Coach Works as a low-volume replacement for the Ranchero.

The third-generation Ford Mustang is the model most often associated with the Fox platform; it’s often referred to as a Fox-body car. Early cars were often anemic but enthusiasts credit this version of the Mustang for renewing the nameplate’s ties with performance. The limited-edition SVO model made between 1984 and 1986 defiantly argued forced induction was an adequate replacement for displacement with a 2.3 four-cylinder turbocharged to 200bhp in its most potent configuration.

The Fox platform was unusually modular for its time. Lincoln managed to use it to underpin the seventh-generation Continental introduced in 1981 for the 1982 model year. Using an evolution of the Mustang’s architecture allowed Ford’s luxury brand to surf the downsizing wave sweeping across the American automotive industry during the early 1980s, resulting in a Continental that was 18in shorter and 400lb lighter than the its predecessor. It remained as cushy and softly-suspended as ever before.

Ford executives likely noticed they had bitten off more than they could chew when they launched a strategy called Global Shared Technologies in the late 1990s. The idea was to significantly reduce the number of architectures and drivetrains in the company’s parts bin in order to streamline the development process. The C1 platform found under the second-generation Focus was designed to underpin a wide panoply of cars ranging from economy-oriented hatchbacks to premium convertibles.

This approach made sense, but America wasn’t included in its streamlining campaign. The second-generation Focus sold in the United States between 2007 and 2010 was a completely different car built on an evolution of the C170 platform inaugurated in 1998 by the original Focus.

Ford built the Focus on a platform named C1 and Mazda’s original 3 rides on an architecture called BK. What gives? They’re fundamentally the same thing. Ford, Mazda and Volvo joined forces in the late 1990s to design the platform in Germany and they chose to give it their own internal designation. The Swedes called it P1 when it underpinned the C30 and the V50, among other models.

The tie-up made sense. At the time, Ford owned a big stake in Mazda and 100% of Volvo.

Ford developed the EUCD platform to underpin the larger cars in its global range. The three variants of the third-generation Mondeo were built on it, as was the S-Max people-mover, but Ford wasn’t the architecture’s main beneficiary. Its luxury divisions, notably Volvo, built considerably more cars on it.

Land Rover’s Freelander 2 (sold as the LR2 in the United States) was the only SUV made on the EUCD platform. The car-derived architecture didn’t prevent engineers from dialing in a generous amount of ground clearance and giving the model better-than-average off-road capacity.

Volvo built more cars on Ford’s EUCD platform than any company. The first model to use the architecture was the second-generation S80 introduced in 2006. Its derivatives (including the rugged XC70 and the China-only long-wheelbase S80 L) were EUCD-based, too. The original XC90 should have been built on it as well but Volvo chose to use the P2 platform it designed before it joined Ford instead.

Mitsubishi built the tenth and final generation of the rally-bred Lancer Evolution on the GS platform it developed jointly with Chrysler. The firm made numerous modifications to the architecture before deeming it worthy of underpinning a high-performance model. Other cars built on the GS platform include the Eclipse Cross launched in 2017 and the Delica D:5 van released in 2007.

MK is the name given to Chrysler’s version of the platform it co-developed with Mitsubishi. The partnership between the two brands ended in 2004 and Chrysler, which by then had merged with Daimler, made several changes to the architecture before putting it under the original Jeep Compass, among other models. The little-known Mitsubishi connection partly explains why the MK-based Compass and Patriot are more road-oriented than other models in the Jeep portfolio.

Nissan sells millions of front-wheel drive cars annually but it needs a rear-wheel drive architecture in its portfolio to build performance cars on. The V35-generation Skyline introduced in 2001 and sold as the Infiniti G35 in some markets inaugurated the FM platform the company designed with power and handling in mind. The 370Z launched in 2009 and still sold in 2020 is built on it, too.

Nissan created and owns Infiniti so seeing the two brands share platforms, engines and other components isn’t surprising. What’s more unusual is witnessing an automaker use a rear-wheel drive architecture as the foundation on which to build an SUV. That’s what Infiniti did when it released the FX. Its proportions and its exceptionally sharp handling leave confirm it’s closely related to the 370Z.

The second-generation FX (which became the QX70 about halfway through its life cycle) was FM-based, too. Time will tell if the next Z car tentatively due out as the 400Z in 2020 in will spawn an SUV.

Peugeot’s hugely versatile second-generation Partner made its debut in 2008. Buyers could choose from a variety of four-cylinder engines, though an electric powertrain was available in some markets, and Peugeot again offered people- and cargo-carrying variants. Every version of this van was built on the PF2 platform shared with the 308, the 3008 and the DS 5, among many other models.

The shapely, concept car-like Peugeot RCZ is the only coupe built on the PF2 platform, meaning its underpinnings are related to the Partner’s. Engineers made comprehensive updates in order to tighten its handling and the flagship R model’s turbocharged, 267bhp four-cylinder made any connection with its Ikea-friendly sibling completely indiscernible. Autocar praised its performance and its handling. The RCZ R shared its 1.6 with several Mini models but that’s a different story for a different time.

General Motors has a decades-long history of building vehicles using the components it finds in its parts bin but Saturn was once a notable exception to the rule. Its first car, the S Series, was built on a brand-specific architecture. This strategy quickly proved too expensive so later Saturn models shared mechanical and chassis components with other cars in the General Motors portfolio.

The short-lived Aura was one of 15 cars built on the two variants of the Epsilon architecture. The list also includes the Saab 9-3, the Vauxhall Vectra, the Pontiac G6 and the Chevrolet Malibu.

One of the lesser-known Epsilon-based models is the second-generation Fiat Croma. Marketed as the Comfort Wagon, this segment-bending four-door was the product of the short-lived alliance between Fiat and General Motors. The fiasco cost Detroit approximately $2 billion but it lasted just long enough for Fiat’s management team to negotiate, among other things, the use of the Epsilon platform.

If you enjoyed this story, sign up to Autocar’s newsletter for all the best car news, reviews and opinion direct to your inbox. Click here to subscribe.