Fiat Platform Plans: 38 Vehicles On Five Platforms

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Facing declining sales in Europe [ AN [sub] says Fiat’s Italian market share just fell below 30 percent for the first time since 2005], and a US-market turnaround of its Chrysler Group brands that has won over few believers, Fiat has laid out its strategy for ongoing viability: a move to modular platforms each of which will support an increasing number of models. In 2006, Fiat says it built 32 nameplates off of 19 architectures; by the end of this year it hopes to build 38 models on 11 platforms. By 2014, Fiat plans to have switched over to an all-new modular platform system which will allow the same 38 models to be built on five basic architectures. Volume per architecture is the name of the game in the modern global car business, and Fiat aims to keep up… if not quite to the extent of Volkswagen’s plan to base 60 models on a single modular architecture.

Fiat’s plan centers around three major architectures and their variants. The first, called Mini Global Architecture, is shared with Ford, and currently underpins the Fiat Panda and the Fiat 500. This platform will receive a major overhaul, as Fiat prepares to start selling 500s in the US. By 2014, Fiat would like to sell 1.2m units based on this platform, including several hundred thousand Chrysler Group-branded minicars.

Similarly, Fiat’s SMall Global Architecture is in the midst of a re-engineering to prepare it for US-market model duty. The updated platform, based on the current Punto chassis, is also being engineered for greater flexibility, as it will be used extensively in future Brazilian-market Fiat products. The first of these products is Fiat’s Uno, and the new platform is being optimized for low-cost production in the Brazilian market. By 2014, Fiat hopes to be basing 1.1m units off of this platform, including about 150k Chrysler-badged units.

Perhaps the most important new platform for Fiat though is the Compact Global Modular Architecture, which just debuted on the new Europe-market Alfa-Romeo Giulietta, and will seek to rival VW’s MQB platform in the Golf-dominated C-segment. Thanks to its modular design, the platform will be available in two wheelbase lengths, as well as two track widths. In addition to front-drive versions, the CGMA will also support all-wheel-drive applications, including compact SUV and crossover models.

Autocar explains some of the CGMA’s details:

Fiat engineers had to incorporate the ability to have two different lengths of front overhang, at least two different heights for the base of the windscreen, and the ability to accommodate larger wheel wells for SUV models.

In effect, the Compact platform has a common front bulkhead and front crash structure, and a common rear floorpan and rear crash structure. To lengthen the wheelbase, there’s an extra pressing that can be inserted between the centre and rear floorpan structures.

Depending on the type of vehicle, a different structure is added on top of the front bulkhead, dictating the position of the windscreen and the front door hinges. The sill structure and rear wheel housing is a single pressing that accommodates different wheelbases and wheel sizes.

Fiat hopes to eventually produce 1.4m vehicles on this platform, including replacements for the Bravo/Delta as well as larger cars and and CUV/SUVs. In contrast, VW’s MQB platform encompasses this Golf segment, as well as the Polo (small) and Lupo (mini). In short, VW is doing with one extremely flexible platform what Fiat plans to do with the three platforms described here. Presumably, Fiat’s remaining two platforms are the Chrysler LX/LY RWD platform (300C, Charger) and the new 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee’s platform, both of which were inherited from Chrysler.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 8 comments
  • Tricky Dicky Tricky Dicky on Jun 04, 2010

    Ed - surely Fiat's engineers have had the time to study in great details VW's legendary MQB platform and it's extreme flexibility. And yet they still come up with 3 different platforms that cover the same range of vehicles. What are we to conclude? Different design constraints, Fiat's engineers did a rush job or are a bit stupid (they aren't!), or perhaps their analysis led them to the conclusion that they found a better overall compromise? What would make this article even more interesting is some insights from VW Group designers and the limitations placed upon them by having to use MQB... Perhaps the tentative conclusion we could come to out of all of this, is that Fiat will be bringing out higher quality vehicles, better adapted to their environment, than some vehicles in VW's small car range? Whatever the conclusion, we should credit Fiat's engineers for having a good reason for taking the approach they did.

    • Stingray Stingray on Jun 04, 2010

      "perhaps their analysis led them to the conclusion that they found a better overall compromise" Maybe this is the reason behind their decision.

  • Splateagle Splateagle on Jun 04, 2010

    Point of interest Ed - the Mini Global Architecture, is "shared with Ford" in that Ford outsourced development and production of their Mk2 Ka to FIAT. The article could be read as suggesting Ford were actively involved in the platform's development, which would be misleading. Looking at some of the products of VW's platform strategy there are some obvious shortcomings FIAT might well be hoping to avoid. There's very little product differentiation in the VW group small car line-up (Fox up to Golf and their assorted badge-variant relatives). They're all perfectly good cars but also all very same-ey. FIAT's traditional strong suit has always been small cars, in all their variety (which is considerable here in Europe). It makes sense then that they'd not want to cripple their engineers with a one-size-fits-all platform approach in their strongest and busiest segments. VW by contrast have an equally strong presence across the board so there are real savings to be made for them developing platforms for bigger cars, savings which wouldn't currently be there for FIAT given they already have the (perfectly good) Chrysler LX/LY platform to play with.

  • Lorenzo Heh. The major powers, military or economic, set up these regulators for the smaller countries - the big guys do what they want, and always have. Are the Chinese that unaware?
  • Lorenzo The original 4-Runner, by its very name, promised something different in the future. What happened?
  • Lorenzo At my age, excitement is dangerous. one thing to note: the older models being displayed are more stylish than their current versions, and the old Subaru Forester looks more utilitarian than the current version. I thought the annual model change was dead.
  • Lorenzo Well, it was never an off-roader, much less a military vehicle, so let the people with too much money play make believe.
  • EBFlex The best gift would have been a huge bonfire of all the fak mustangs in inventory and shutting down the factory that makes them.Heck, nobody would even have to risk life and limb starting the fire, just park em close together and wait for the super environmentally friendly EV fire to commence.
Next