FYI: DC matching prices on "economy" parts

On Sun, 15 May 2005 01:14:13 -0400, "Daniel J. Stern"
> wrote:

>On Sat, 14 May 2005, Bill Putney wrote:
>
>> Any experience with the "CAPA" certified parts? Has the business
>> changed (improved in that regard) over the last few years? Maybe the
>> rule of "OEM body parts are always better" does not apply anymore?
>
>None. Fortunately -- touch wood -- I haven't needed to worry about where
>any body parts come from. But should that day come, I will be perfectly
>happy to dispense with any glossy propaganda from the Certified
>Aftermarket Parts Association (or whatever CAPA stands for) and simply
>judge part quality by country of origin. Did the part come from North
>America, Europe, certain specific South American countries, certain
>Mexican plants, Australia, or Japan? Fine with me. Did it come from China,
>Taiwan or another such cesspool? Not fine with me.


In many cases, a high quality (and there are some) Taiwanese or Korean
part can be better than a cheap british, european, american part in
both fit and quality. Problem is, it's hard to tell, and quality
control, while abyssimal in many american plants, is even worse in
many asian plants. In the same batch of parts from a given supplier,
you can get both parts that fit perfectly and those that require
significant adjustment. Makes no never-mind WHAT country they come
from.

Here is CAPA web page
http://www.capacertified.org/

Sarge

In article >,
John David Galt > wrote:
>You seem to be using a dictionary I haven't seen or heard of. By
>"copycat" parts I (and everyone I've ever talked on this subject)
>merely mean parts made by somebody other than the manufacturer of the
>car.
>
>Like store-brand food products, it's a matter of opinion (and also
>varies from one kind of part to another) whether these are every bit
>as good as the name-brand products. Certainly the term doesn't
>imply that they aren't.

There have been published tests of aftermarket auto body parts.

The results were not enouraging. The aftermarket parts fitted worse and
rusted more easily. Aftermarket bumper parts didn't withstand bumps as
well.

Look around for those modified cars with big wings and other aftermarket
body parts mean to "look good". Chances are, many of those parts are
poorly fitting. Now, if those parts meant to "look good" are poorly
fitting, what does that say for parts meant only to be cheaper?

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

"Timothy J. Lee" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> John David Galt > wrote:
> >You seem to be using a dictionary I haven't seen or heard of. By
> >"copycat" parts I (and everyone I've ever talked on this subject)
> >merely mean parts made by somebody other than the manufacturer of the
> >car.
> >
> >Like store-brand food products, it's a matter of opinion (and also
> >varies from one kind of part to another) whether these are every bit
> >as good as the name-brand products. Certainly the term doesn't
> >imply that they aren't.
>
> There have been published tests of aftermarket auto body parts.
>
> The results were not enouraging. The aftermarket parts fitted worse and
> rusted more easily. Aftermarket bumper parts didn't withstand bumps as
> well.
>
> Look around for those modified cars with big wings and other aftermarket
> body parts mean to "look good". Chances are, many of those parts are
> poorly fitting. Now, if those parts meant to "look good" are poorly
> fitting, what does that say for parts meant only to be cheaper?

Huh?

>>> 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.

>> You seem to be using a dictionary I haven't seen or heard of. By
>> "copycat" parts I (and everyone I've ever talked on this subject)
>> merely mean parts made by somebody other than the manufacturer of the
>> car.

> Yes, indeed. And while that's a nice overspanning theoretical definition,
> in the real world the term refers to Chinese crapola.

What planet are you on?

>> My company, Farmers, offers an optional rider that lets you insist on
>> original parts, if you want to pay extra for that coverage.

> Oh, how big-hearted of them. Pay them *extra* and they'll do their job.
> Wow, how magnanimous.

"I want it, therefore it's their job" is a teenage moron's view of reality.

Planet Prejudice.

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

"John David Galt" > wrote in message
...
[...]
>
> What planet are you on?
[...]