The Genesis of Automotive Architecture: From Platforms to Modularization
19 May 2025
At its essence, "architecture" in the automotive context refers to the foundational, standardized framework upon which multiple vehicle models are built. It's the engineering blueprint that allows a manufacturer to efficiently design and produce a diverse range of vehicles—from sedans to SUVs and MPVs—sharing a significant percentage of underlying components. This strategic approach dramatically accelerates research and development cycles while simultaneously slashing production costs. For Chinese automakers, embracing proprietary architectures has thus become an unavoidable, indeed, an essential, rite of passage to global competitiveness. Yet, for all its undeniable benefits, this journey has proven remarkably arduous, especially when industry titans like Volkswagen and Toyota have been leveraging their MQB and TNGA architectures, respectively, for over a decade.
To truly appreciate the complexity and strategic importance of automotive architecture, one must first dissect the modern automobile. Broadly, a vehicle comprises four primary domains: the powertrain responsible for propulsion, the chassis supporting the entire structure, the external body, and the myriad electronic systems that govern everything from safety to infotainment. However, when disassembled further, this pinnacle of human industry reveals itself as an intricate tapestry woven from nearly 30,000 individual components. Imagine an automotive OEM with multiple vehicle types—sedans, SUVs, MPVs—each with several distinct models under its umbrella. The sheer number of unique parts required would be astronomical. It's akin to tackling a 6,020-piece LEGO Hogwarts Castle, only for a parent to abruptly introduce a 4,080-piece loose Disney Castle set into the mix—a daunting prospect for even the most dedicated builder.
Furthermore, once a vehicle is assembled, it must undergo rigorous testing and production commissioning, a process that can take anywhere from three to five years, consuming immeasurable human and financial capital. This immense burden of R&D costs propelled automakers in the late 20th century into the first phase of automotive architectural evolution: Platformization, championed by pioneers like General Motors.
Picture yourself as an engineer tasked with overseeing your entire R&D department to develop a new car platform. Drawing inspiration from Aristotle's "first principles," your initial logical step is to identify commonalities. To maximize component sharing across different vehicle models, you begin by categorizing similar vehicles within your group. You establish benchmarks for various size classes, from small to large, and subsequently design all subordinate models around these templates. This approach dictates fundamental design choices: smaller-displacement engines for entry-level vehicles might be transversely mounted, utilizing cost-effective McPherson suspensions. Higher-end models, accommodating larger, longitudinally mounted engines (which allow for longer front ends, enhancing buffer zones and freeing up space for superior double-wishbone front suspensions for enhanced ride and handling), would adhere to a different standard. This intuitive rationalization birthed platforms like Volkswagen’s renowned PQ and PL platforms. Such organized structuring provided clear development directives, requiring only minor configuration adjustments every few years.
Yet, this wasn't enough. The relentless pursuit of efficiency and profit drove automakers to an even more ambitious concept. What if different vehicle segments could share a common platform? This bold idea ushered in the second phase of automotive architecture: Modularization, the very concept that continues to dominate industry discourse today.
The Modular Dream and Its Realities: Volkswagen's MQB and Its Blind Spot
The ideal state of modularization envisions vehicle components assembling like LEGO bricks, offering unparalleled flexibility. However, achieving this ideal rapidly plunged engineers into a maelstrom of intricate design challenges.
First, scalability across disparate vehicle sizes presented a monumental hurdle. A single platform needed to accommodate wheelbase variances of 20 to 30 centimeters while simultaneously supporting fundamentally different body types like sedans and SUVs. This demanded an assurance of structural rigidity even when stretched or significantly reconfigured.
Second, powertrain versatility was paramount. The architecture needed to support a wide range of engine and transmission options, necessitating the design of powerplants with inherent modification potential to spawn various low- and high-power output versions. This engineering and material exploration transformed engineers into "tuning maestros," endlessly optimizing parameters.
Furthermore, with the exponential rise of electronic control technologies—such as Electronic Stability Program (ESP) and advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS)—vehicles required pre-embedded cameras and radars to adapt to future technological advancements and software updates. Even after this exhaustive design phase, each individual vehicle variant still needed to undergo rigorous vehicle testing and system validation. Only then could a truly modular platform be deemed complete.
Even for Volkswagen, a pioneer in platformization, the journey to its groundbreaking MQB (Modular Transverse Matrix) platform was a colossal undertaking, costing an estimated $60 billion USD. Their methodology was meticulously structured: they fixed the distance from the front axle to the accelerator pedal, anchoring the engine layout. They developed the aluminum-block EA211 engine, designed with a 12-degree rearward tilt (like a diesel engine) to ensure compatibility with both gasoline and diesel powertrains. Once the engine layout was solidified, the entire chassis configuration naturally followed suit. Simplified suspension combinations further streamlined assembly processes, minimizing unnecessary manufacturing complexity.
Under this established paradigm, the MQB platform dramatically reduced the difficulty of vehicle design. Coupled with Volkswagen's global scale and standardized production, component commonality soared to 70-80%, drastically streamlining the supply chain and facilitating co-production. It's akin to a "Cooking Mama" or "Overcooked" scenario for burgers: everyone needs meat and buns, but whether you add cheese or tomatoes depends on the specific order. This architectural strategy allowed Volkswagen to reap immense profits. From 2012 to 2022, Volkswagen produced over 32 million MQB-platform vehicles, achieving a staggering 30% reduction in manufacturing time and a 20% cut in production costs.
However, even industry exemplars are not infallible. Volkswagen, in its otherwise meticulous foresight, critically overlooked one pivotal development: the advent of new energy vehicles (NEVs). While older joint-venture internal combustion engine (ICE) models rested on their laurels, the NEV revolution, driven by innovations in intelligent cockpits and software-defined architectures, rapidly outpaced them. Volkswagen's deep reliance on its legacy platforms led to awkward "oil-to-electric" conversions, causing them to miss crucial transformation opportunities. This underscored a fundamental truth: a future-proof architecture must be conceived with electrification at its very core.
China's Architectural Ascent: The Geely-Volvo Synergy and Lynk & Co's Innovation
When discussing pioneers in platform strategy within China, the Geely Group's Lynk & Co brand stands out. Around 2010, at a time when Volkswagen and Toyota were announcing the launch of their modular platforms, Chinese automakers achieved a remarkable "snake swallowing elephant" feat in automotive history: Geely's acquisition of Volvo.
Following the acquisition, Geely's Chairman Li Shufu (referred to as "Brother Shufu" in the text) prioritized platform development for Volvo. Having previously relied on Ford's technology, a newly independent Volvo desperately needed its own engine and platform technology. Simultaneously, Geely, then in the early stages of its independent R&D, urgently sought to enhance the competitiveness of its product portfolio. Automotive architecture emerged as the perfect conduit for this symbiotic relationship. Both parties converged: Geely provided the capital, and Volvo contributed the expertise. Together, they embarked on the development of the SPA (Scalable Product Architecture) platform and the VEA (Volvo Engine Architecture) engine cluster.
With a keen foresight characteristic of agile Chinese enterprises, the SPA platform was designed from its inception to accommodate various powertrain forms: traditional gasoline, plug-in hybrid (PHEV), and pure electric (BEV). This adaptability has allowed SPA to flourish in Europe to this day. During this period, Geely and Volvo further cemented their collaboration by establishing the China Euro Vehicle Technology (CEVT) R&D center in Europe, jointly creating the Lynk & Co brand. Just two years after the SPA platform’s debut, the CMA (Compact Modular Architecture) platform was also born, specifically targeting the compact vehicle segment.
Over the years, the Lynk & Co brand has garnered significant acclaim for its superior handling and safety features, directly attributable to the underlying architectural strengths. Lynk & Co 03 has permanently etched its name in the WTCR (World Touring Car Cup) history, and Lynk & Co models on the road have earned the moniker "road tanks," a testament to their robust safety credentials. Through years of close collaboration with their Swedish counterparts, Chinese engineers progressively developed independent R&D capabilities. A recent triumph illustrating this is the highly successful Lynk & Co 07 and 08 EMP models, which utilize the CMA_EVO platform – a version specifically modified by the Chinese team for plug-in hybrid vehicles and optimized interior space.
With matured technology as their bedrock, Lynk & Co naturally began to refine the SPA platform. Recently, during a technical sharing session for the new SPA_EV architecture, engineers and product managers provided direct insights. The new SPA_EV architecture boasts impressive scalability: vehicle length can extend beyond 5 meters, and the wheelbase can be widened from 3050mm to 3300mm, comfortably accommodating large SUV formats. In the real-world experience of the Lynk & Co 0900 (previously referred to as 900), the third-row seating offers ample space – a direct spatial advantage afforded by the architecture.
As adept practitioners of "three-electric" systems (battery, motor, electric control), Chinese engineers have further leveraged the large SPA_EV architecture to integrate a plethora of cutting-edge technologies. These include industry-leading dual wheel-side motors on the rear axle and a remarkable rear-wheel steering system capable of up to 20 degrees of steering angle. The synergy of these three electric motors allows for advanced maneuvers; with one rear wheel turning forward and the other backward, the vehicle can execute a precise "waltz turn." Navigating tight spaces and U-turns becomes effortlessly nimble. While these advanced maneuvers are increasingly common across various brands, for a Lynk & Co vehicle, the core focus remains on handling and safety.
Wang Gong, a Lynk & Co engineer, highlighted that the Lynk & Co 0900, despite being a large SUV over 5 meters long and nearly 2 meters wide, equipped with CDC (Continuous Damping Control) and dual-chamber air suspension, weighs only 2.7 tons. This is notably light among its three-motor peers, a result of meticulous material optimization across the vehicle. For instance, the double-door ring D-pillar is made of integral hot-formed steel, extending to cover all four support pillars (A, B, C, D), reducing weight while simultaneously tripling strength. The suspension system extensively utilizes aluminum alloy, while lighter yet stronger magnesium alloy is employed in areas such as motor casings and seat frames. The automotive adage "better ten catties lighter than ten horsepower added" rings true here, as Lynk & Co prioritizes weight reduction to optimize handling. For the changes in chassis hard points (stress points) caused by the widened and lengthened SPA architecture, they've implemented reinforcements and improvements to refine driving quality. Such substantial investments in unseen areas underscore a commitment to performance and safety. As a slight aside, one might humorously wonder about the repair costs for such advanced materials and integrated structures – a common, albeit pragmatic, thought for many procurement specialists.
Safety, a cornerstone of the Volvo legacy, is where the engineers expressed immense pride. Wang Gong meticulously explained Lynk & Co's "wheel jettison for survival" principle. Unlike some competitors with direct front crash beams, SPA_EV employs a unique front crash beam with a subtle curvature on both sides. In the event of an offset collision, this design diverts the impact force laterally, directing it to the similarly curved vehicle frame, which then absorbs the subsequent collision. Ultimately, the force is directed towards the wheels, and the front suspension's aluminum control arms are designed to detach laterally upon impact, preventing intrusion into the passenger compartment, thus achieving the observed "wheel jettison" (or controlled wheel separation) to protect occupants.
Rear-end collision safety has also seen significant reinforcement. Beyond merely having a thicker rear crash beam than typical vehicles, SPA_EV's rear longitudinal beams are hot-formed. They've even gone to the "extreme" extent of installing a high-strength steel plate within the third-row seat structure, ensuring that every seat, including the rearmost, offers uncompromising safety. This commitment was dramatically demonstrated at the launch event, where the Lynk & Co 0900 successfully passed a 100 km/h rear-end collision test, a feat few competitors can achieve.
Furthermore, with new energy vehicles, battery safety is paramount. The SPA_EV architecture underwent an all-scenario, extreme-condition battery safety test, including simulated collisions, mechanical impacts, and high-altitude drops, with standards far exceeding national requirements. These are merely the foundational passive safety measures.
As an NEV, features like active collision avoidance systems that link with the chassis domain's braking system to proactively identify and avoid stationary or slow-moving obstacles are becoming commonplace. However, Wang Gong proudly announced that the Lynk & Co 0900 can achieve AEB (Autonomous Emergency Braking) at speeds up to 130 km/h, likely making it a class leader. While we pressed for more details, inquiring whether this impressive AEB performance stemmed from breakthroughs in chip computing power or if the modular architecture would eventually allow for hardware OTA (over-the-air) updates for vehicle owners, the specifics remained under wraps.
The overall impression from the technical sharing session was that Lynk & Co’s extensive prior experience in architectural development has made them exceptionally adept at handling the SPA_EV. Safety and handling remain Lynk & Co's core competencies. However, what truly piqued our curiosity was the glimpse into their central integrated digital architecture, known as LKEA.
In traditional ICE vehicle architectures, various vehicle components, from the engine to even minor electronic rearview mirrors, each possessed their own ECU (Electronic Control Unit), or vehicle computer. As the number of these devices proliferated, inter-device communication rapidly consumed the vehicle's bandwidth – metaphorically speaking, the "network" became congested. In the past, this might not have been a critical issue, but with the widespread adoption of L2-level assisted driving features, where human lives are at stake, any computational lag could have dire consequences. Consequently, most new energy vehicle manufacturers are now transitioning to integrated domain control. This involves segmenting the vehicle into domains such as power, chassis, cockpit, ADAS, and body, and consolidating the ECU functionalities into fewer, more powerful centralized units. Fewer "people" to manage, easier to govern. This integration also necessitates increasingly powerful computing capabilities, leading to progressively smarter vehicles.
The SPA_EV's LKEA central integrated digital architecture is a prime example of this evolution, consolidating from dozens of previous domain controllers down to just five core controllers. This design allows for computational power reuse, making function deployment more flexible and convenient. The impressive 130 km/h AEB performance is a direct testament to its capabilities. Theoretically, this central digital architecture could enable future SPA_EV-based models to excel in tests like the Moose Test: the central digital architecture could command the LiDAR to pre-scan the environment, then calculate the vehicle's optimal trajectory, and even activate rear-wheel steering to assist the driver in navigating the obstacle more effectively. When encountering large-radius curves, the central digital architecture could similarly utilize radar and cameras for pre-scanning, then instruct the air suspension to proactively adjust and maintain body leveling, significantly enhancing ride comfort.
It sounds almost robotic, doesn’t it? Indeed, the purpose of a modern vehicle transcends merely transporting people from point A to point B. Its objective is to maximize the utilization of intelligent capabilities to control the vehicle – functions that were simply unattainable in previous ICE architectures. This is precisely why Lynk & Co invested so heavily in developing the SPA_EV architecture. In the past, intelligent driving was considered a relative weakness for Lynk & Co. Now, with SPA_EV and the Lynk & Co 0900, Lynk & Co possesses its strongest credentials, showcasing a near-unique, luxurious large-scale architecture that simultaneously meets the demands for flexible dimensions and space, while also integrating cutting-edge safety and intelligence. This demonstrates Lynk & Co's willingness to listen to user feedback and reinforces its standing as China's first successful high-end automotive brand to penetrate the European market, showcasing its commitment and profound technical expertise within the Geely family's premium positioning.
The Unseen Battleground: Architecture as the Future of Automotive Innovation
At the close of the technical sharing session, Wang Gong offered a compelling vision for the future of automotive development. He emphasized the immense difficulty of developing automotive architectures, a process that, for the ultimate user experience, demands anticipating technological trends five to ten years into the future. Consensus in the industry points towards concepts like steer-by-wire, brake-by-wire, chassis-by-wire, and the broader "robotization" of automobiles, along with the "decoupling and cloudification" of vehicle systems. Every major player is predicting and fiercely competing in these areas. The introduction of Lynk & Co's SPA_EV represents their proactive readiness to step onto this higher echelon of automotive engineering.
