Toyota Aygo and Citroen C1. Logic suggests these two cars would have identical constructions, but apparently not.
The previous generation small car from Toyota and PSA, though basically the same vehicle, differed quite markedly in its rear treatment, particularly in 5 door form.
The Toyota is more conventional and looks, maybe, the slightly more substantial, grown-up car with a full body panel, seamlessly integrated with the body structure from sill to roof. All the normal joins are present – bumper to wing/wing to door/door to wheelarch/tailgate to rear wing, etc.
The Citroen and Peugeot versions, however, simplify this greatly, dispensing with anything that could be identified as a rear wing so that the door abuts the bumper directly, with the high level rear light spanning the gap between rear door and tailgate and with the door running directly into the wheelarch. This is by far the more interesting solution and, you’d guess, a cheaper one too.
So why did Toyota choose the fussier route? It’s unlikely that PSA could teach Toyota much about reducing production costs, so was it an aesthetic decision? Or maybe just to differentiate it from the PSA cars? It seems odd to have a collaborative venture that uses two distinctly different solutions.
In Mark 2 form the situations are strangely reversed. Citroen seems to have adopted Toyota’s previous approach, whilst Toyota is going for a more radical look, though without the panel saving of the original C1. The Aygo actually looks like the C1’s successor and vice-versa.