This has been demonstrated by crash tests conducted at the IIHS.

Message Author
ampm-bookmark
delicious-small Add to delicious
yahoomyweb-small Add to YahooMyWeb
blinklist-small Add to BlinkList
PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:58 am   Post subject:   

Quote:
WOOps, also forgot to mention that manufacturers tell you to buy original equipment manufacturer (OEM) parts for your vehicle to ensure safety and performance, but did you know these manufacturers don't even make their own parts?




But, I think even these manufacturers would assign such projects to vendors who reflect a good track record in terms of delivery and quality.



Also, they would conduct routine checks to see that such quality satisfies all parameters associated with their brand names.

_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved.
anonymous00
Guest







PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:18 am   Post subject:   

Mike, I really do not want an all out arguement over this. We both have our opinions on after market parts. I have been told countless times by garages, parts stores, reading different articles and internet searches that after market parts are safe. Critics claim that using parts from sources other than OEMs could compromise safety. However, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) says that there are no safety implications of using these parts. This has been demonstrated by crash tests conducted at the IIHS. So they are tested.

Lets leave it at if you want to use OEM parts thats fine. You should be able to get them cheaper now since the development of aftermarket parts have brought down the prices of OEM parts.

fireyone
Senior member
Leave a quick message

fireyone

Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1986


2.38 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:49 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
I don't know why.
LaughingWink cause I could smell a marathon thread comin' on and I wasn't disappointed, but great point here Todd!
Quote:
I'm just glad we can all finally agree that AM parts are just as good as OEM and there is no reason not to use AM parts
Quote:
I surely hope anyone reading this and is deserving of, won't be disappointed,if at retirement time, they get a knockoff rolex
With this economy any of us are gonna' be damn lucky to get 'retirement' period...forget your rolex mike.. Wink I'll take it back to my 'generic' prescriptions Mike...if you're paying which are you buying? hmmmmmm...you buy the generic Rx and you know it....right? please please please give me THAT .....
Quote:
My Missouri State Unfair Claims statute says that insurers must pay the costs of alteration to make imitation parts fix. Good luck with that and if they are exactly of the same quality, why would they need altered to fit?
"Show me" Mike...where in the fair claims practices it says that (might...I haven't read the entire thing in years...but want to 'see' it)...
Quote:
Fireyone do you feel that the manufacturers of parts are entitled to recover the vast sums of money required by the government to product test and crash test every outer shell sheetmetal part that is installed on a vehicle allowed to be sold by the Automakers?
Mike you gotta' ''show me'' again, where a) the gov't. required, and b) where ANY manu. crash tests replacement parts, prior to them being available for use, every bumper, fender, hood door, etc? don't think so my friend....
Quote:
The after market parts that you say are produced by vendors are generally non crash related parts
Just like OEM replacement parts Mike?

Quote:
or reduce premiums for consumers
That's not true Mike...(http://www.pciaa.net/web/sitehome.nsf/lcpublic/372/$file/After marketParts0808.pdf) - this study even allows an addition 2hrs for a/m part installation Rolling Eyes which we know is not true on every single part...and it STILL saves tons of money for the consumer as well..
Quote:
Based on the loss costs (i.e., losses per insured vehicle)10 of the various coverages affected by the use of non-OEM parts, it is estimated that the total insurance vehicle damage loss cost would increase by 6.0 percent if these parts were no longer allowed. Since the vehicle damage loss cost represents about 50 percent of the total loss cost (reflecting all liability and physical damage coverages), the total insured loss cost would increase by about 3.5 percent. In other words, consumers with physical damage coverages would pay an additional 3.5 percent (or $32) more per

insured car if aftermarket parts were no longer allowed.
Apparently a lot of smart cookies disagree as well with the 'safety' arguement..(http://www.smartmotorist.com/traffic-and-safety-guideline/ cosmetic-crash-parts-are-irrelevant-to-auto-safety.html)
Quote:
There are no safety implications of using cosmetic crash parts from any source. The source of a car's cosmetic crash parts is irrelevant to crashworthiness. This is demonstrated in a new Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash test
Apparently recents crash studys show that not having ANY parts on the vehicle (ie crash parts, outter sheetmetal) preform the same as if there were parts on the vehicle (regardless of these parts origin)...meaning (apparently) no fender, or hood are the same (safety wise for the occupants) as if you have any kind on the vehicle at crash (or none)...interesting information...really...


_________________

"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr.
Lori
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

Lori
Forum Expert

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8080

Location: Missouri
287.93 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:48 pm   Post subject:   

"

Quote:
Show me" Mike...where in the fair claims practices it says that (might...I haven't read the entire thing in years...but want to 'see' it)...


20 CSR 100-1.050 Standards for Prompt,

Fair and Equitable Settlement of Claims





Quote:
A. The insurer discloses to the

claimant in writing, either on the estimate or

in a separate document attached to the estimate,

the following information in no smaller

than ten (10)-point type: This estimate has

been prepared based on the use of an automobile

part(s) not made by the original

equipment manufacturer. Parts used in the

repair of your vehicle by other than the original

manufacturer are required to be at least

equal in like, kind and quality in terms of fit,

quality and performance to the original manufacturer

parts they are replacing.
All aftermarket

parts installed on the vehicle shall be

clearly identified on the repair estimate;

B. No insurer shall require the use of

after-market parts in the repair of an automobile

unless the after-market part is at least

equal in like, kind and quality to the original

part in terms of fit, quality and performance.

Insurers specifying the use of after-market

parts shall consider the cost of any modifications

which may become necessary when

making the repair;
and




An oem part compared to an a/m part can easily be shown to be "not Like and not equal" in quality to a disinterested non biased person having nothing to gain by stating the truth.



It's very simple,metaphorically speaking, beef filet is promised by contract and mandated by the state, and if you are willing to have ground chuck and it makes you happy, then by all means enjoy ground meat. But when someone tries to give you ground chuck when you paid for fillet, then someone is not honoring their contract.



Quote:
Mike you gotta' ''show me'' again, where a) the gov't. required, and b) where ANY manu. crash tests replacement parts, prior to them being available for use, every bumper, fender, hood door, etc? don't think so my friend....




That's the problem there is no mandate for crash testing of all outer sheetmetal a/m parts. The oems are required to invest and crash test all originally designed parts. Why shouldn't a reverse engineered part be required to meet those tests and why should they not be required to pay for the original tests if they are going to make cheap imitations.



Quote:
Mike, I really do not want an all out arguement over this. We both have our opinions on after market parts. I have been told countless times by garages, parts stores, reading different articles and internet searches that after market parts are safe




You're right, you have opinions based on hearsay and what you have been told but have you any actual hands on experience with the installation, painting, and warrantying of these parts?

On the other hand, I have years of experience in installing both parts and I have an expert opinon rather than a layperson's feeling about these parts.



I'll concede that aftermarket engine parts often exceed the original manufacturers specifications but we're talking outer sheetmetal parts.


_________________

If you can't find the time to do it right, how will you ever find the time to do it over.
MikeoftheOzarks
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 605

Location: in the missouri ozarks
193.97 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:45 pm   Post subject:   

No Mike I have not had alot hands on experience. I have always been interested in repair and have watched ALOT of after market parts go onto vehicles and even helped my husband and brother put them on. I am telling you HONESTLY that we never had a problem with the fit of these parts or painting. As for warrenty we never had to deal with that issue because we have not had problems wiht them. I will give you the credit for probaly running into a few problems since its a job to you and a hobby for us. Just like any part whether OEM or A/M somewhere along the line your going to get a bad one. I know my experiences with parts probaly does not nearly equal yours, my point from the beginning is if they want to put after market parts on MY vehicle..go for it. I have seen these parts hold up just as well as OEM parts. As long as it looks good and drives well I really do not care if I am driving a mercedes or a dodge. Everything does not always come down to a dollar sign. I have a strong belief that expensive isn't always better.

fireyone
Senior member
Leave a quick message

fireyone

Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1986


2.38 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:56 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
As long as it looks good and drives well I really do not care if I am driving a mercedes or a dodge. Everything does not always come down to a dollar sign. I have a strong belief that expensive isn't always better.




To the average person that doesn't understand what is owed to them under language of the state statutes or the wording of a policy you've made my point.



As long as it looks good and drives well is not what is owed. There are a lot of good looking cars driving well that are future death traps as exposed in post repair inspections even from preferred repair shops and independents alike.





Quote:
Based on the loss costs (i.e., losses per insured vehicle)10 of the various coverages affected by the use of non-OEM parts, it is estimated that the total insurance vehicle damage loss cost would increase by 6.0 percent if these parts were no longer allowed. Since the vehicle damage loss cost represents about 50 percent of the total loss cost (reflecting all liability and physical damage coverages), the total insured loss cost would increase by about 3.5 percent. In other words, consumers with physical damage coverages would pay an additional 3.5 percent (or $32) more per

insured car if aftermarket parts were no longer allowed.




To believe we are having this discussion because insurers can save $3.75 per month per policyholder is amazing. Because insurers are willing to concede the use of generic parts instead of original quality parts to save the price of a whopper a month is a juicy whopper. So it really is all about saving a few dollars.


_________________

If you can't find the time to do it right, how will you ever find the time to do it over.
MikeoftheOzarks
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 605

Location: in the missouri ozarks
193.97 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:15 am   Post subject:   

Quote:
Insurers specifying the use of after-market parts shall consider the cost of any modifications which may become necessary when making the repair
Sorry again Mike, but this prior quote does NOT say this next statement to me...
Quote:
My Missouri State Unfair Claims statute says that insurers must pay the costs of alteration to make imitation parts fix.


Do insurers not pay cut, trim and fit on some used assy? I've never paid (in over 20 years) additional time to hang an a/m part...if we have a bad part...fine, don't use it...just takes a phone call..



Quote:
That's the problem there is no mandate for crash testing of all outer sheetmetal a/m parts
Orginal Equipment Manu. don't either though...they do not, nor are they required by the gov't. to crash test ANY replacement parts, your, (this following) statement was a little misleading, at best, the oem is required to test their newly built vehicles...but NOT their replacement/crash parts...
Quote:
required by the government to product test and crash test every outer shell sheetmetal part that is installed on a vehicle allowed to be sold by the Automakers?
Quote:
Why shouldn't a reverse engineered part be required to meet those tests and why should they not be required to pay for the original tests if they are going to make cheap imitations.
ah...because they don't build cars which is the ONLY time the OEM is required to crash test Mike, and you know this....
Quote:
To believe we are having this discussion because insurers can save $3.75 per month per policyholder is amazing. Because insurers are willing to concede the use of generic parts instead of original quality parts to save the price of a whopper a month is a juicy whopper. .
The insurer's are also saving Mike...surely you didn't forget that.... Wink I'll tell you what depending on the vehicle/insured and coverages...this could add up over a years time...mom and dad, and two teenagers, four cars, high premiums...yep it's more than 3.75 a month for them...and I'm sorry with this economy a bucks a buck buddy, and I'm for keeping all of 'mine' I can...



Quote:
So it really is all about saving a few dollars
Well duh....who said it wasn't? not me...it's about saving the insurance company and the insured money...but what is wrong with that Mike? Don't you try to save a buck wherever you can in your business? Of course you do...and I know where you are going...and NO IMO (and the O of many) these savings are not at the expense of quality/saftey or anything else negative you want to say... Wink [/quote]


_________________

"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr.
Lori
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

Lori
Forum Expert

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8080

Location: Missouri
287.93 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:55 am   Post subject:   

Lori, so your saying if a part does not fit all the garage has to do is call and the adjuster takes care of it ? sounds like a great way to handle things. The way I see it is insurance could cost a heck of a lot more if all the garages were required to use OEM parts. Would using OEM parts not drive up the cost of the repair and then the cost of insurance also somewhere along the line. These parts are as safe as any other in my "average person" opinion. I do not know why people are always screaming "this is what is owed to me". If the insurance companies were doing such a bad job at getting vehicles repaired you would think they would lose business and it would be smothered all over the news. I am in agreement with you..a buck is a buck is a buck...

fireyone
Senior member
Leave a quick message

fireyone

Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1986


2.38 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:32 am   Post subject:   

Quote:
As a collision business owner, it is my responsibility, as the expert seen by the courts, to repair your vehicle with parts that bear no danger to you and your occupants. I carry liability coverage for making those decisions.



Does it seem fair to you that someone can copycat your product and not perfrom any crash test studies to determine the safety of you and your family.
Are you suggestion that these parts being used provide safety? Aside from hoods, they don't. It's been brought up before... fender, door skins, lower 1/4 panels, etc are _not_ part of the saefty system of the vehicle.
tcope
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

tcope
Forum Expert

Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 6175

Location: Salt Lake City, UT
375.37 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:10 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
Lori, so your saying if a part does not fit all the garage has to do is call and the adjuster takes care of it ?
yep it's called a supplement and they happen all the time...
Quote:
The way I see it is insurance could cost a heck of a lot more if all the garages were required to use OEM parts
Of course it is...and it would continue to rise....
Quote:
Would using OEM parts not drive up the cost of the repair and then the cost of insurance also somewhere along the line
exactly...
Quote:
These parts are as safe as any other in my "average person" opinion.
And here is the deal...crash test prove that with all of these parts off the car (with exception of hood on 'some' cars)...the safety is the same...these parts are only to 'pretty up' the vehicle, and provide no safety at all...they crash tested vehicles with the parts stripped off the car, and with the parts on the car, and there was no difference to the passengers safety...



Here's my deal..if you are paying for it yourself what would you buy and put on your vehicle? Same with the generic drugs I keep asking Mike about...which one do you 'opt' for? You have a choice there and most people chose the generic/aftermarket because it's as good (or so they say Wink ) and it costs less...another thing if nothing else a/m parts have forced the oem's to greatly reduce the price of their (previously) over priced parts...in fact I'd say the vast majority of the estimates I write with a/m parts the oem vendor is 'price matching' the a/m and new oem goes on the car for the price of a/m....now how is that possible? I'll tell you how because the oem has been gouging the ka-who-ga's out of everyone, and they can't do it anymore (well they still do it on some parts), because there is an 'alternative'.
Quote:
Are you suggestion that these parts being used provide safety? Aside from hoods, they don't
the highway safety recently did a crash test with no parts on the car....same result...these parts are not safety items....no one seems to want to answer that question, along with others, (especially my generic drug question)


_________________

"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr.
Lori
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

Lori
Forum Expert

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8080

Location: Missouri
287.93 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 2:39 pm   Post subject:   

I actually looked into a lot of this about midway through the post just to give benefit of the doubt. I find that my assumptions were correct and so was the information from garages and auto stores..they are safe. We have used these parts for years.I am sure when my vehicles were repaired at different times they were used. As I said thats fine by me. I knew it had to keep insurance down somewhere along the line but even if it didn't I still fail to see waht the big deal is. I like your example of perscription drugs...it was rather fitting.

fireyone
Senior member
Leave a quick message

fireyone

Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1986


2.38 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:49 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
Insurers specifying the use of after-market parts shall consider the cost of any modifications which may become necessary when making the repair

Sorry again Mike, but this prior quote does NOT say this next statement to me... Quote:

My Missouri State Unfair Claims statute says that insurers must pay the costs of alteration to make imitation parts fix.




Are you saying that considering the cost is not meant to be interpreted as paying of the cost to make alterations to make the parts fit? The code is in the state statutes.



One of the studies that you quoted appear to have been paid for by property and casualty industry. It would appear to be biased since they had something to gain by their a favorable outcome. For every pci study done, there is one done by the manufacturers that prove differently.


_________________

If you can't find the time to do it right, how will you ever find the time to do it over.
MikeoftheOzarks
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 605

Location: in the missouri ozarks
193.97 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:14 am   Post subject:   

Quote:
Are you saying that considering the cost is not meant to be interpreted as paying of the cost to make alterations to make the parts fit?
Well kind of yeah, that is what i'm saying...I don't know what 'alterations' you are going to make to an a/m fender/h/lamp, bumper cover, etc...but if i had a shop that said to me (as an example) 'look lori, ''i'' charge 2 or 3 ADDITIONAL hours per a/m panel used in a repair in my for ''alterations''... then i would weigh this (crazy IMO) request/demand against the cost of a new oem part. But in truth, we both know that would be the vehicle owners responsiblity if they want to use that shop...but the difference in price would of course (more times than not) would be less to use the OEM part.



I understand this is in the fair claims practice code Mike, but when have you ever seen or heard of this being paid? and what exactly are the 'alterations'? If the part is junk, then you don't use it...you don't fight it you call the adjuster tell them this particular part just doesn't fit, then the adjuster says, 'ok, get an oem' or 'I'll call keystone (or whomever) and see what the problem or history on this part is and call you right back'...
Quote:
One of the studies that you quoted appear to have been paid for by property and casualty industry. It would appear to be biased since they had something to gain by their a favorable outcome. For every pci study done, there is one done by the manufacturers that prove differently
If by that you mean the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety ...then yeah. who else does 'unbiased' crash studys? they do the majority of their work on brand new vehicles (you know this)...I don't know what you mean by a p&c company though.....'show me' where a OEM did a CRASH study with oem and a/m parts REPLACEMENT parts , AND no parts on the vehicle...to gauge the occupants safety...don't think there is one...



Are you saying Mike, (as Tcope asked)
Quote:
Are you suggestion that these parts being used provide safety? Aside from hoods, they don't. It's been brought up before... fender, door skins, lower 1/4 panels, etc are _not_ part of the saefty system of the vehicle


_________________

"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr.
Lori
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

Lori
Forum Expert

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8080

Location: Missouri
287.93 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:06 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
understand this is in the fair claims practice code Mike, but when have you ever seen or heard of this being paid? and what exactly are the 'alterations'? If the part is junk, then you don't use it...you don't fight it you call the adjuster tell them this particular part just doesn't fit, then the adjuster says, 'ok, get an oem' or 'I'll call keystone (or whomever) and see what the problem or history on this part is and call you right back'...




When the law was written, it was not uncommon, and perhaps all too often, a/m parts required wollering out of bolt holes, tweaking and twisting to contour to bodylines. Insurers by law were required to pay for the time to make these parts fit. This has improved but I can share pictures with you of crowns and bows of hoods (from the last 6 months) that do not even align to the same a/m companies fenders all of which are suppose to be oem equivalent.



Am I going to halt production to wait twenty four or more hours for another bad a/m part? probably not! I take authorization from the owner for installing a new oem part and the insurer always pays for both. The a/m part companies don't even want the parts back, they say toss em in the metal bin. Absent the vehicle owner not wanting to pay for the oem part, we will twist and tweak to make them fit as best as possible and bill for additional labor or get a credit from the distributor for the labor.



Insurers specify that a/m is all they will pay , and generally the a/m vendor will pay the cost to repair the new part to make useable or just give it to the shop. In many instances they will just credt the shop for the cost of oem and credit the junk part since it is they the (distributor for the manufacturers) that must warranty these parts.





Quote:
Are you suggestion that these parts being used provide safety? Aside from hoods, they don't. It's been brought up before... fender, door skins, lower 1/4 panels, etc are _not_ part of the saefty system of the vehicle




Any double walled fender which incorporates the apron is considered in the timing of the air bag. HSS oem radiator supports and back bars for bumpers are often specified a/m which are also safety items.



You have some insurers even specifying non certified parts in their estimates on which settlements are based. They only upgrade to capa certified if it is brought to the insurers attention by the vehicle owner who was informed by the shop. Anything to save a buck. Sent a supplement for a capa headlite from a prominent Missouri insurer because the price they specified was for a non certified value line headlamp that the distributor claimed on the inventory was not even insurance quality. Wait is that an oxymoron? They probably mean oem quality.


_________________

If you can't find the time to do it right, how will you ever find the time to do it over.
MikeoftheOzarks
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 605

Location: in the missouri ozarks
193.97 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:33 pm   Post subject:   

Quote:
HSS oem radiator supports and back bars for bumpers are often specified a/m which are also safety items.
I agree these are structural components, a core support and rebar, but we are not talking about those...(fyi, the company i work for will not use ANY a/m structure parts)...we are talking about exterior sheet metal mike.
Quote:
You have some insurers even specifying non certified parts in their estimates on which settlements are based. They only upgrade to capa certified if it is brought to the insurers attention by the vehicle owner who was informed by the shop
If this is true, (and I'm not doubting you I just don't know)...then I totally am in agreement with you...in that ONLY capa certified parts should be written on a/m parts...
Quote:
Sent a supplement for a capa headlite from a prominent Missouri insurer because the price they specified was for a non certified value line headlamp that the distributor claimed on the inventory was not even insurance quality. Wait is that an oxymoron? They probably mean oem quality.
Well who ever wrote that was, a bit of a moron too...but see you've made my point...(well one of them) if there is an issue, it's as simple as contacting the adjuster and getting a supp paid...bing bang boom, you're done...no problem...



On another note, I finally remembered to ask 'my' shops re: do you ever get 'used' a/m parts when you buy 'used' parts or clips...none, zero, noda...not one, in fact they all looked at me like i was nuts....so as i said before this is clearly a yard issue, not a shop or ins issue...i don't know about the parts in PA but (as I have said) here in "God's country" this is not a problem (was that this thread or another one? Embarassed )


_________________

"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr.
Lori
Forum Expert
Leave a quick message

Lori
Forum Expert

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8080

Location: Missouri
287.93 Dollars($)

All times are GMT
 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next  
Page 6 of 8


Get free auto insurance quote
State Auto Insurance Laws in USA

USA Auto Insurance laws
Ask Community Experts

flash plugin

Quick Links

Must See

Community

Hot topics in forums

Latest in blogs

AmPmInsure on Facebook



Page loaded in 0.364 seconds.