FYI: DC matching prices on "economy" parts

Just got our 300M back after having a new hood and some other body parts
replaced (I don't know why that post decided to jump out in front of
*my* car). The insurance co. had specified "economy" parts where
available, but the repairer told me that DC was (at least temporarily)
matching prices, so all the parts they replaced are in fact genuine
DC/Mopar parts.

Perce

On Fri, 13 May 2005, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

> Just got our 300M back after having a new hood and some other body parts
> replaced (I don't know why that post decided to jump out in front of
> *my* car). The insurance co. had specified "economy" parts where
> available, but the repairer told me that DC was (at least temporarily)
> matching prices, so all the parts they replaced are in fact genuine
> DC/Mopar parts.

Good for you, but you're under no obligation to accept repairs made with
"economy" (cheesy Chinese copycat crap) parts. The insurance company is
obliged to return your car to what is known as "pre-loss condition". If
your car didn't have Chinese-made sheetmetal parts on it before the
collision, you don't have to accept them after the collision. You may want
to rethink your choice of insurance company before you're forced to
contend with them in a bigger mess.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 13 May 2005, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
>
>
>>Just got our 300M back after having a new hood and some other body parts
>>replaced (I don't know why that post decided to jump out in front of
>>*my* car). The insurance co. had specified "economy" parts where
>>available, but the repairer told me that DC was (at least temporarily)
>>matching prices, so all the parts they replaced are in fact genuine
>>DC/Mopar parts.
>
>
> Good for you, but you're under no obligation to accept repairs made with
> "economy" (cheesy Chinese copycat crap) parts. The insurance company is
> obliged to return your car to what is known as "pre-loss condition". If
> your car didn't have Chinese-made sheetmetal parts on it before the
> collision, you don't have to accept them after the collision. You may want
> to rethink your choice of insurance company before you're forced to
> contend with them in a bigger mess.

When I had a repair done about 3 years ago (new fender), the body shop
pointed out to me that so-called OEM parts from Chrysler are likely to
be from the same sources as any other aftermarket body part - and can be
pretty crappy - not made to the same standards as what came on the new
car. Also, I'm told that the aftermarket body parts industry has
improved - as long as the parts are "CARTS" (I may not have the acronym
exactly correct) certified, you'll do just as well (no worse) than
getting pseudo-OEM parts from the dealer.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

"Bill Putney" > wrote in message
...
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 May 2005, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Just got our 300M back after having a new hood and some other body parts
>>>replaced (I don't know why that post decided to jump out in front of
>>>*my* car). The insurance co. had specified "economy" parts where
>>>available, but the repairer told me that DC was (at least temporarily)
>>>matching prices, so all the parts they replaced are in fact genuine
>>>DC/Mopar parts.
>>
>>
>> Good for you, but you're under no obligation to accept repairs made with
>> "economy" (cheesy Chinese copycat crap) parts. The insurance company is
>> obliged to return your car to what is known as "pre-loss condition". If
>> your car didn't have Chinese-made sheetmetal parts on it before the
>> collision, you don't have to accept them after the collision. You may
>> want
>> to rethink your choice of insurance company before you're forced to
>> contend with them in a bigger mess.
>
> When I had a repair done about 3 years ago (new fender), the body shop
> pointed out to me that so-called OEM parts from Chrysler are likely to be
> from the same sources as any other aftermarket body part - and can be
> pretty crappy - not made to the same standards as what came on the new
> car. Also, I'm told that the aftermarket body parts industry has
> improved - as long as the parts are "CARTS" (I may not have the acronym
> exactly correct) certified, you'll do just as well (no worse) than getting
> pseudo-OEM parts from the dealer.
>
> Bill Putney
And how do you figure, when they are made at the factory building the cars.
That is why the presses for sheetmetal are beside the lines! And the run
faster then the line to supply replacement parts. They are not subletted to
foreign companys, like switches, etc.

David wrote:
> "Bill Putney" > wrote in message
> ...

>>When I had a repair done about 3 years ago (new fender), the body shop
>>pointed out to me that so-called OEM parts from Chrysler are likely to be
>>from the same sources as any other aftermarket body part - and can be
>>pretty crappy - not made to the same standards as what came on the new
>>car. Also, I'm told that the aftermarket body parts industry has
>>improved - as long as the parts are "CARTS" (I may not have the acronym
>>exactly correct) certified, you'll do just as well (no worse) than getting
>>pseudo-OEM parts from the dealer.
>>
>>Bill Putney
>
> And how do you figure, when they are made at the factory building the cars.
> That is why the presses for sheetmetal are beside the lines! And the run
> faster then the line to supply replacement parts. They are not subletted to
> foreign companys, like switches, etc.

If you know otherwise, OK, but I find it *very* hard to believe that the
manufacturers do anything other than assemble parts that they contract
from suppliers. Are you speaking with authority? I speak as one who
worked for a supplier of a particular commodity thru the early 90's and
visited Ford and Delphi/GM plants quite a few times - they are almost
exclusively assemblers of purchased parts and "manufacture" almost
nothing. To be honest, we did not supply to Chrysler, but I would be
surprised if they don't operate the same way.

In any case, I wouldn't be surprised if the acceptance tolerances are
quite a bit looser in the OEM/aftermarket parts (i.e., production
fallout), as we would often sell fallout of the parts we made to
"special" buyers within Ford and GM for sale as "OEM" replacements thru
the dealers (again, Chrysler probably did the same). IOW, the slogans
that say things like "Be sure to always buy Genuine ABC parts" are
somewhat misleading/fruadulent.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

"Bill Putney" > wrote in message
...
> David wrote:
>> "Bill Putney" > wrote in message
>> ...
>
>>>When I had a repair done about 3 years ago (new fender), the body shop
>>>pointed out to me that so-called OEM parts from Chrysler are likely to be
>>>from the same sources as any other aftermarket body part - and can be
>>>pretty crappy - not made to the same standards as what came on the new
>>>car. Also, I'm told that the aftermarket body parts industry has
>>>improved - as long as the parts are "CARTS" (I may not have the acronym
>>>exactly correct) certified, you'll do just as well (no worse) than
>>>getting pseudo-OEM parts from the dealer.
>>>
>>>Bill Putney
>>
>> And how do you figure, when they are made at the factory building the
>> cars. That is why the presses for sheetmetal are beside the lines! And
>> the run faster then the line to supply replacement parts. They are not
>> subletted to foreign companys, like switches, etc.
>
> If you know otherwise, OK, but I find it *very* hard to believe that the
> manufacturers do anything other than assemble parts that they contract
> from suppliers. Are you speaking with authority? I speak as one who
> worked for a supplier of a particular commodity thru the early 90's and
> visited Ford and Delphi/GM plants quite a few times - they are almost
> exclusively assemblers of purchased parts and "manufacture" almost
> nothing. To be honest, we did not supply to Chrysler, but I would be
> surprised if they don't operate the same way.
>
> In any case, I wouldn't be surprised if the acceptance tolerances are
> quite a bit looser in the OEM/aftermarket parts (i.e., production
> fallout), as we would often sell fallout of the parts we made to "special"
> buyers within Ford and GM for sale as "OEM" replacements thru the dealers
> (again, Chrysler probably did the same). IOW, the slogans that say things
> like "Be sure to always buy Genuine ABC parts" are somewhat
> misleading/fruadulent.

Yes, I have been on the floor of many plants, and they make all sheetmetal
at the plants. That is why they have the pentastar on the sheetmetal. It is
called a makers mark, and only parts made by Chrysler can have the pentastar
mark. What probably happened in your case is the dealer was selling the
bodyshop korean sheetmetal to make margins, he wouldn't get with the oem
sheetmetal. But you are right about tolerances. Chrysler tolerances are
pretty lax compared to Japanese manufacturers. The only sheetmetal
outsourced, was the infamous plastic fenders on lh cars. which never lined
up flush with the hood and doors. But then we had a high tolerence, they
actually used quarters to line up as close as possible.

I would also be surprised if Ford and Gm outsourced sheetmetal. They used to
outsource bodies in the old days but I do believe sheetmetal is all inhouse
among manufacturers. It is easier to make inhouse as they are less
susceptible to damage from moving around to much. as they would if they had
to be trucked.

"David" > wrote in message
news:5qqhe.6099$eU.3650@fed1read07...
>
> "Bill Putney" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>> On Fri, 13 May 2005, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Just got our 300M back after having a new hood and some other body parts
>>>>replaced (I don't know why that post decided to jump out in front of
>>>>*my* car). The insurance co. had specified "economy" parts where
>>>>available, but the repairer told me that DC was (at least temporarily)
>>>>matching prices, so all the parts they replaced are in fact genuine
>>>>DC/Mopar parts.
>>>
>>>
>>> Good for you, but you're under no obligation to accept repairs made with
>>> "economy" (cheesy Chinese copycat crap) parts. The insurance company is
>>> obliged to return your car to what is known as "pre-loss condition". If
>>> your car didn't have Chinese-made sheetmetal parts on it before the
>>> collision, you don't have to accept them after the collision. You may
>>> want
>>> to rethink your choice of insurance company before you're forced to
>>> contend with them in a bigger mess.
>>
>> When I had a repair done about 3 years ago (new fender), the body shop
>> pointed out to me that so-called OEM parts from Chrysler are likely to be
>> from the same sources as any other aftermarket body part - and can be
>> pretty crappy - not made to the same standards as what came on the new
>> car. Also, I'm told that the aftermarket body parts industry has
>> improved - as long as the parts are "CARTS" (I may not have the acronym
>> exactly correct) certified, you'll do just as well (no worse) than
>> getting pseudo-OEM parts from the dealer.
>>
>> Bill Putney

> And how do you figure, when they are made at the factory building the
> cars. That is why the presses for sheetmetal are beside the lines! And the
> run faster then the line to supply replacement parts. They are not
> subletted to foreign companys, like switches, etc.
Would you be able to identify the North American DC assembly plant where
"the presses are beside the lines"? As a follow up, would you be able to
indicate the types of sheet metal parts produced at, say, the Twinsburg (OH)
or Sterling (MI) stamping plants?

>> Just got our 300M back after having a new hood and some other body parts
>> replaced (I don't know why that post decided to jump out in front of
>> *my* car). The insurance co. had specified "economy" parts where
>> available, but the repairer told me that DC was (at least temporarily)
>> matching prices, so all the parts they replaced are in fact genuine
>> DC/Mopar parts.

> Good for you, but you're under no obligation to accept repairs made with
> "economy" (cheesy Chinese copycat crap) parts. The insurance company is
> obliged to return your car to what is known as "pre-loss condition". If
> your car didn't have Chinese-made sheetmetal parts on it before the
> collision, you don't have to accept them after the collision. You may want
> to rethink your choice of insurance company before you're forced to
> contend with them in a bigger mess.

This is usually not true. The insurance company is required to restore
your car to its previous functionality and value, but if they can do
that with copycat parts, you have to accept them or pay the difference.

> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>> Good for you, but you're under no obligation to accept repairs made with
>> "economy" (cheesy Chinese copycat crap) parts. The insurance company is
>> obliged to return your car to what is known as "pre-loss condition". If
>> your car didn't have Chinese-made sheetmetal parts on it before the
>> collision, you don't have to accept them after the collision. You may
>> want
>> to rethink your choice of insurance company before you're forced to
>> contend with them in a bigger mess.

John David Galt wrote:
> This is usually not true. The insurance company is required to restore
> your car to its previous functionality and value, but if they can do
> that with copycat parts, you have to accept them or pay the difference.

I would think that using cheaper aftermarket parts would lower the
overall value of the vehicle. That would certainly go against the goal
of restoring the car to its previous *value*.

On Sat, 14 May 2005, John David Galt wrote:

> > Good for you, but you're under no obligation to accept repairs made
> > with "economy" (cheesy Chinese copycat crap) parts. The insurance
> > company is obliged to return your car to what is known as "pre-loss
> > condition". If your car didn't have Chinese-made sheetmetal parts on
> > it before the collision, you don't have to accept them after the
> > collision. You may want to rethink your choice of insurance company
> > before you're forced to contend with them in a bigger mess.
>
> This is usually not true. The insurance company is required to restore
> your car to its previous functionality and value, but if they can do
> that with copycat parts, you have to accept them or pay the difference.

Copycat parts, by definition, are not as functional nor as valuable as
original-equipment parts. Therefore, it is not possible for a car to be
restored to previous functionality and value with copycat parts. "Original
appearance" isn't sufficient.