The TC rode on the Q platform, which literally was a bespoke platform designed for this car only, and no other car rode on it.
No other car used the SN-95 platform but the 1994 Mustang. Ford spent far more money developing it than Chrysler ever did on any platform in the 1980s after the Aries came out. Despite looking like a Grand Am, the 1994 Mustang was a significantly larger, heavier and
especially wider car than the Fox Body Mustang.
It's a pretty short list of drivetrain parts (despite all the work Ford put into designing it) that you can't go to a junkyard, unbolt from an SN-95 that someone wrapped around a tree and put in a Fairmont. Or a Granada. Or an LTD. Or a T-Bird. Or the previous Mustang.
Ignoring Lamborghini, stuff Mitsubishi made for them and stuff they inherited from Renault, Chrysler had three car platforms in the 1980s:
The one the Omni used, that the Rampage/Charger also used (as well as the Simca equivalent, more or less).
The one that the Fifth Avenue used, which was just a rebodied Aspen.
The one the Aries used, that
everything else used in some form for the rest of the decade.
There were
no "bespoke platforms" at Chrysler from when they were bailed out by the US government in 1979 until the Viper came out over a decade later; to say nothing about the fact that you posted it as if the TC was completely unrelated to anything else in Chrysler's lineup when the entire drivetrain was lifted straight out of the Daytona, even down to the off the shelf Mitsubishi V6s when Chrysler started phasing out the turbo engines soon after it debuted. Chrysler could call it a bespoke platform all they wanted and I'm sure that was enough to convince at least one person that it made the car a huge bargain compared to a 300SL, but it wasn't.
The Daytona rode on the G platform (later the AG platform), which wasn't related to the K. I can see where you are coming from through, as many 80s Chrysler products were K-car derivatives (400, 600, New Yorker/E-Class, Caravan/Voyager).
No, not "many." "All." Everything Chrysler made in the 1980s was related to the K except for the Omni and Fifth Avenue.
Everything. They shortened and lengthened the wheelbase as necessary to try and slot it into different market niches and made some of them coupes and gave some of them turbo engines and made some of them swoopy and modern looking (for the time) styling and put stiffer shocks and springs in some of them to make them reasonably sporty and around ~1990 gave the majority of them new sheetmetal and interiors to try and offset how hopelessly outdated they were, but underneath every single one of them was the same car.
That's why they all have pretty much the same drivetrains, and a new engine or transmission being introduced in one would be introduced in nearly all of them.
That's why they all have the same interior ergonomics, including the very stubby, nearly-vertical dashboard/cowl; whether it was a swoopy (theoretical) Porsche 944 competitor:
Or a stylish yuppie convertible:
Or a car that was two rectangles stacked on top of each other:
That's why they all have pretty much the same track width and thus overall body width, no matter if you have a subcompact Dodge Shadow (which was about the same size as a Corolla but a bit wide for the class norm) or a full size Chrysler Imperial (which was about the same size as a Fleetwood but
significantly narrower)
That's why the engine bay:
of:
every:
single:
one:
looks:
identical:
for:
every:
single:
one:
It's just as plain as how everything based on the Falcon was obviously based on the Falcon, with its super distinctive shock towers.
