Do you use aftermarket crash parts? Why or why not? A BodyShop Business purchasing profile, released in June '98, showed that 73.2 percent of respondents purchase aftermarket crash parts. They use them on 23.8 percent of their repairs, and return them 18.5 percent of the time because they don't fit or comply. More than a quarter of the respondents (26.8 percent) don't use aftermarket crash parts. They say they don't because of poor fit, poor quality, they only buy original equipment manufacturer (OEM) parts, or because there's no profit in the venture.

Aftermarket crash parts - specifically those produced by an independent, non-OEM parts manufacturer - are often compared unfavorably to OEM collision parts, those manufactured by the automotive OEM or an OE auto parts supplier to the OEM. Questions of quality fuel the debate, as do worries of lower profits and increased administrative costs. Rumor has it that aftermarket crash parts never fit, are forced on the shop owner by cost-cutting insurance companies, and result in increased cycle time, either through the extra effort it takes to make them fit, or through the extra time it takes to return them and reorder other parts.

Are any of these rumors true? Sometimes. But Clay Hansen, at least, finds ways to make aftermarket crash parts fit into his successful business. Hansen, owner for more than 15 years of C&H CARSTAR in Ogden, Utah, says "There's an appropriateness for the use of aftermarket crash parts, and certain cars and certain situations where it's inappropriate."

When asked about the advantages of using aftermarket crash parts, Hansen replied, "You're going to keep some cars from totaling. We've got some cars that, frankly, would be total losses without aftermarket parts." Aftermarket crash parts are categorically less expensive than OEM parts, and though this primarily results in a savings for the insurance company that pays for the repair, it also results in savings for the consumer whose premium remains lower, and even, perhaps, for the collision shop owner who is provided with more opportunities to repair when the lower cost of parts keeps vehicles from totaling.

The savings work especially well for older cars. While aftermarket crash parts can be nonexistent for newer cars, they are often plentiful in regard to older cars, for which low cost repairs can be crucial in keeping the vehicle from being totaled. Aftermarket crash parts also cause less diminished value concerns for older vehicles. Said Hansen, who often bids used parts for older cars, "Ninety-nine point nine percent of the customers we have now are driving used cars. It may be new to them, and they may still be making payments, but the car is used. They may be apprehensive when we bid a used door, but we tell them, 'You're driving a used car.'"

Clearly, there is a place for the aftermarket crash part. However, many collision repairers feel the trend has gotten out of hand and that aftermarket crash parts are now forced on them in every situation, even the most inappropriate. Paul Van Aken, owner of Paul's CARSTAR in Monroe, Mich., since 1982, feels that "in only about 300-400 customers' cars could we save the car or make the repair affordable for them by using aftermarket crash parts."

Insurer demand obviously calls for a much higher percentage of use. An aftermarket parts policy provided by Nationwide Insurance states in part, "Nationwide Insurance believes that using aftermarket parts benefits consumers by helping to keep the physical damage and collision coverages of their automobile insurance premium as low as possible." When aftermarket crash parts are mandated, Van Aken said he's given it a "willing effort" time after time. Yet he reported that he sees several very serious deficiencies in the manufacture of aftermarket crash parts.

"I don't know that much about the business of manufacturing products, but I would assume that [aftermarket crash parts manufacturers] use cheaper labor and cheaper materials. That's obvious. You compare products, and generally speaking, the metal isn't the same as OEM." Though Van Aken added that his statements apply only to the aftermarket crash parts he's seen, he said, "if it fits it takes more time, and if not it takes more time to reorder."

Both Hansen and Van Aken use only aftermarket crash parts certified by the Certified Automotive Parts Association (CAPA). CAPA was established in 1987 as a non-profit organization designed to develop and oversee a testing and certification program for parts used for auto body repairs. Last year, CAPA certified over 2.5 million parts. Though statistics vary, they received between 985 and 1,200 complaints on those parts.

Despite the relatively low number of complaints, both Hansen and Van Aken expressed dissatisfaction, and in some cases, distrust, of CAPA parts. Hansen, though he said he has seen aftermarket crash parts that fit very well, described CAPA certified parts in general as "categorically, not as good as OEM parts. They're improving, but they're in general not as good as OEM parts." Van Aken, alternatively, said that he might desire aftermarket crash parts more if the CAPA certification "lent more credibility."

"It's a great idea they came up with. The problem is it's meaningless," said Van Aken.

"Time and time again body shops get burned on this, and they and the vehicle owners are the ones bearing the expense of misfits and poor quality repairs that wind up on the car."

When asked about problems with CAPA parts, Jack Gillis, CEO of CAPA, described two reasons that some CAPA parts are eventually decertified: "The main thing is that [though a factory may manufacture a CAPA certified part] many of the parts a factory sells don't meet CAPA standards. The manufacturer thinks, 'Why should I work so hard to make CAPA parts good?' There is a natural tendency to slack off a bit. The OEM manufacturer will also make changes to its part. If the OEM makes a change to its part, it could be that our part no longer matches that one. The manufacturer then has the choice of making that change or removing the part from our program."

If many collision repairers doubt that Gillis' statements reflect the extent of CAPA's problems, or those of the aftermarket crash parts manufacturers in general, they have recently been joined by two very important fronts: the consumers and the OEMs.

Admittedly, OEMs have a very clear motive for casting doubt on the quality of aftermarket crash parts: an aftermarket crash part sold is an OEM part that is not sold. With this in mind, OEMs often post warnings about aftermarket crash parts on their Web sites and in their advertising. Ford Motor Company's Web site defines aftermarket crash parts as "unauthorized copies of genuine crash parts. While cheaper, there are questions about the quality of the aftermarket crash parts. There also is evidence that use of new aftermarket crash parts may reduce the resale value of your vehicle, and that your vehicle warranties may be affected."

Regardless of Ford's motives for its message, consumers have listened. Vehicle owner David Kalmback filed a $3,133.28 diminished value claim against Nationwide, which insisted on the use of aftermarket sheet meta to repair his vehicle. Kalmback won a judgment of $2,995.89, though Nationwide is appealing. And in Williamson County, Ill., vehicle owners Tammy Snider and Michael Avery have filed a class action suit against State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. The suit affects all persons in the United States (except those residing in Arkansas and Tennessee) who were insured by State Farm and had "non-factory-authorized and/or non-OEM 'crash parts' installed on their vehicles or else received monetary compensation determined in relation to the cost of such parts." Snider and Avery's suit is expected to go to trial in February.

Yet another backlash of the aftermarket crash parts trend may do more to directly benefit the consumer and shop owner. OEM replacement parts are notoriously expensive. Each year, the Alliance of American Insurers conducts replacement parts studies, comparing the price of a new vehicle to the price of a vehicle built from OEM replacement parts. Most recently, the Alliance found that a 1997 Taurus that retails for approximately $18,985 would cost more than $72,250 if built from OEM replacement parts, and a 1998 Ford Explorer, retailing for approximately $27,145, would cost more than $77,000 if built from OEM replacement parts.

As mentioned before, the high cost of OEM replacement parts is one good reason aftermarket crash parts are so often used. To make its products more competitive, Ford recently reduced its list prices for some of its frequently damaged crash parts, including hoods, bumpers and fenders. For the Taurus, Sable, F150, Escort and Tracer, these parts were reduced by an average of 35 percent. Ford also introduced the Bumper Fascia Truckload Program, which reduced prices by an average of 29 percent on 41 top-selling bumper fascias.

Therefore, it would appear that the existence of aftermarket crash parts has resulted in the reduction of the cost of OEM parts. Van Aken believes the gap is narrowing between the OEMs and the aftermarket. "We don't see a huge difference in price ... Many times I can buy an OEM part for close to what I pay for an aftermarket part, especially with the difference in gross profit." A more competitive market could also improve quality and availability on both fronts.

An increase in competition between the two markets, OEM and aftermarket, could be one solution to the problems many collision repairers see with aftermarket crash parts. "The purpose of alternate parts is to induce competition," said Gillis. "When there is no competition, the seller can price the part. When there is competition, the price is competitive. When it is competitive with the OEM part, that part will be cheaper than it otherwise would." If OEM parts become more cost competitive with aftermarket crash parts, aftermarket crash parts will, in turn, have to become more quality competitive with OEM parts or lose their favored stance with the insurers.

Other solutions to the divisiveness in the issue are less concrete. Both the collision repairers and the insurers want to make more money, but each of their methods - the insurers' use of aftermarket crash parts to save money, and the collision repairers' use of OEM parts because their higher prices increase shop profit - cost the other side. Hansen sees this problem clearly.

"What you had happen early on is the shops were making fewer dollars [using aftermarket crash parts] and that's what they don't like. The insurance is getting all the cost-saving benefits," said Hansen. "If I make $25 on OEM parts, and I could make $25 on aftermarket parts, I would have no monetary problem with using aftermarket crash parts. If the fit and finish were there and the shop was making the same in gross profit dollars, that would remove any monetary roadblock."

For aftermarket crash parts to become a more viable option, all sides must compromise. Manufacturers must raise the quality and reputation of aftermarket crash parts. Shops must be more willing to test the parts and facilitate needed changes. Insurers must be less willing to put profit before quality, yet more willing to allow shops the profit they need.

These compromises require much from all sides of the industry, but they could be the basis for even more progress. Said Hansen, "If the whole relationship could have more trust, more open communication, that is the solution. But that is the solution for any problem that exists today."

Julie Finn works for ASA's Collision Division. She can be reached at (800) 272-7467.

RATE THIS ARTICLE What do you think of this article? Your input will help AutoInc. develop additional articles on this subject. Share your thoughts! Your name Your e-mail address

MOST ACCESSED ARTICLES Fuel Injection Service, Not Just Cleaning The Art of Extraction EGR Systems: Operation and Diagnosis Proactive Target Marketing:_Rethinking Your Business Strategy Engine Performance: HO2S Diagnostics MOST E-MAILED ARTICLES Developing Employee Potential How Critical Thinking Can Help Your Business How to Diagnose the Ford Glow Plug What to Look for When Shopping for the Right Shop Management Software Putting a Price Tag on Complaints

AutoInc. Web Site | ASA Web Site | State Farm Case Reveals Consumer Crash Parts Views | What to Expect When Buying Tools on Credit | Aftermarket Crash Parts | Managing Your Most Precious Commodity - Time | Top 10 Automotive Repair Web Sites | Guest Editorial | Tech to Tech | Tech Tips | Net Worth | Stat Corner | Chairman's Message