This subject was put forward on a different thread and when you read about it in the motoring context it really is fascinating stuff. I have copied a a piece of the web to clarify:
"A prime example is Germany's Volkswagen AG. Faced with the challenge of reducing the cost of designing and building vehicles while maintaining styling distinctive enough to appeal to different customers, the company has adopted a modular approach based on shared product platforms.
By sharing frames and parts across numerous models and brands, Volkswagen has been able to reduce design costs and consolidate its vehicle operations from 16 product platforms to four."
Now although the company shares frames, parts and designs, they are obvioulsy actually totally different vehicles (I now realise) - they just have the same parts and designs as it says above.
What it means is that VAG can reduce costs and be extremely competitive.
This must be one of the most innovative ways of selling many individual and different products but only desgining them all in one go.
|
Its a great plan, but unfortunately VW are not very good at it and not saving nearly enough money. They can build nearly any VAG group car in nearly any VAG group factory with minimal changes, but cant becuase of retsrictive practices and local politics in each country. They have also discovered that they have THOUSANDS of model variants to keep track of. so thses are being reduced in number.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
They are not the only ones at it, Renault with the Modus / Nissan Note, Ford with the Focus / V50 & S40/ Mazda 3, and Mondeo / X-Type to name but a few. The Focus / V50 & S40 / Mazda 3 are perhaps the best examples, three car with very different characters that retain the fundementally sound attributes of the basic concept.
It can back fire, while it is cheaper to make, for instance, the Golf, A3 and Ibiza based on one plaftform than three different platforms it is even to cheaper to make one car that competes in all three sub sectors, for instance as Honda do with the Civic, if only it were not so damn ugly.
|
>>VW are not very good at it <<
I actually thought they were very good at it.
I mean this is pretty riveting stuff when you think about it - you have all these products that are the same design, same parts and same platforms and yet totally different through the application of Recombinant Modularity.
Once the likes of Honda master this they will probably become as productive as VW.
|
I thought Lego cracked this one years ago. Must be something to do with all of that Carlsberg.
JH
|
I think the article does actually reference lego and the electronics business.
|
|
|
|
What we are seeing is just the latest stages in a long standing move in the motor trade.
I suppose the first example would be the standardisation of nuts and bolts which was mainly driven by the move to "production line" techniques in the late 18th century (if my memory of long ago schooldays is sound!).
In automotive terms the obvious example is the A-series engine. God knows how many vehicles used variations of that.
Now the process has been extended to include drivetrains/floorpans/chassis by almost all manufacturers.
VAG have always been in the forefront - at one time the Passat and Audi 80 were identical vehicles apart from the badging, as are a number of PSA/Fiat models today.
Given the enormous cost of developing a new model from scratch it is no surprise that the manufacturers wish to spread that cost over as many vehicles as possible.
|
What we are seeing is just the latest stages in a
The arch exponents at one time were of course BMC, just think how many versions of the 1100, 1300 and Mini etc there were with Austin Morris, Riley, Wolsey and MG badges applied.
|
The arch exponents at one time were of course BMC, just think how many versions of the 1100, 1300 and Mini etc there were with Austin Morris, Riley, Wolsey and MG badges applied.
The strange thing was that despite 'better' or anyway more elaborate trim and engine/chassis tweaks, the Riley, Wolseley and MG variants of all the transverse-engined Mini and 1100 cars looked so grotesque that you (or anyway I) would want to be paid to own one. The Austin and Morris versions looked perfectly all right.
|
|
|
|
