The minute the saw cut through the metal, Toby Chess knew he was on to something. Based on a tip from a shop owner, the well-known I-CAR instructor had purchased a bumper reinforcement beam for a Toyota Corolla, along with its “aftermarket equivalent,” and set about cutting through them with an extrication saw.

When he attempted to cut through the OEM part, the ultra-high-strength steel in the part actually dulled the blade. Then he set his sights on the aftermarket part.

"I took just a regular hacksaw blade and sliced right through the aftermarket one," Chess says. "I mean it went right through it like a piece of butter. I knew people had to see this or nobody was going to believe it."

So in November, Chess, who also is a national director with the Society of Collision Repair Specialists (SCRS), demonstrated this experiment at the Collision Industry Conference (CIC) meeting in Las Vegas using bumper reinforcements for a 2009 Corolla. He repeated the demo at the CIC and SCRS meetings in Palm Springs, Calif., in January, conducting similar tests on a variety of other parts. The tests created a tremendous buzz at both events that has been followed by a crush of industry attention.

Collision repairers have long voiced concerns about problems with aftermarket crash parts, primarily related to form and fit. But now the industry has targeted safety and crashworthiness issues as well, as insurance companies begin to pressure shops to use aftermarket structural parts to reduce repair costs.

For parts involved in energy transfer during a crash, these deficiencies could impact on the operation of the airbag system.

"The aftermarket companies build these things differently than the OEMs," Chess says. "Is that part going to crush the same in an accident? Probably not. I've cut these things open and you can see how they've welded it completely differently than the OEM."

The industry has taken notice. After Chess gave his presentation at the CIC meeting in Las Vegas, leading aftermarket parts provider LKQ conducted its own tests on the Corolla bumper and promptly withdrew the part from its inventory. According to company spokesperson Sarah Lewensohn, LKQ plans to conduct further testing on additional parts.

The Automotive Body Parts Association (ABPA) has also chimed in, notifying its entire membership that they should review the "inherent properties and testing of all structural parts" with their suppliers. In the event that sufficient testing is not available, ABPA is recommending that companies discontinue the sale of those parts, and notify estimating systems to eliminate them from the parts database.

Since then several other associations, including the Alliance of Automotive Service Providers, the Certified Auto Parts Association, the Collision Repair Association of California and the Taiwan Auto Body Parts Association have chimed in on the issue. See the links at the end of this article for more information.

"Anything that compromises the safety of the vehicle post-repair and adds to the liability of the repair shop is something we need to be concerned about, and need to be accountable for," says Aaron Schulenburg, executive director of the SCRS.

In December, SCRS issued a letter to the OEM Collision Repair Roundtable voicing its concerns about aftermarket parts and the insurance industry's recent practice of specifying the use of aftermarket bumper reinforcements and core supports.

"These are tremendous safety concerns for today’s unknowing motorists, and for the people repairing these vehicles. Unfortunately, as you well know, the leverage and pressure from insurers to use these parts is always present and increasing; and many shops and consumers are put in challenging positions when the proper reimbursement for the loss is compromised for bottom line thinking," the letter stated.

In the letter, the SCRS suggested that OEMs should address this issue through firm warnings, possibly coupled with a scientific study documenting the safety concerns around structural parts.

"At the very least describing how these differences can impact the structural stability and safety of the vehicle and the operability of the SRS system, would provide added credibility to the comments the repair facility shares with their consumer," the letter continued.

A widespread issue

“We all need to be thinking about the consumer, the person that uses that part,” says Mike O'Neal, president of Reflexxion Automotive and Production Bumper Stamps. “The problem is you have so many different factions involved in this that are only thinking about their own agendas."

The Diamond Standard Brand division of Reflexxion has been conducting destructive testing of imported aftermarket structural parts for several years, and has found numerous instances where low or mild strength steel has been used in those parts, as well as absorbers made from polystyrene instead of high-density foam.

The root of the problem is that while OEMs have begun using stronger metals in their vehicle constructions, including ultra and advanced high-strength steels or magnesium, aftermarket manufacturers, particularly lower-cost suppliers overseas, have continued to use cheaper steels. Because multiple manufacturers may be involved in the production of any given part, it's difficult to determine which company made which part, or what materials they used.

“What happened was, when the OEMs changed from low-strength and medium steels to these advanced steels, everybody else kept making parts out of the same low-strength steels,” O'Neal says. “When we started doing our testing, we found the parts didn’t meet the OE standard in terms of the ability to absorb crash action. They aren’t using the right materials, and there’s really no way to trace them.”

This presents a liability challenge to repairers. If an insurance company requires a shop to install an aftermarket structural part on a damaged vehicle, and the safety systems later fail because of a substandard part, it's the repair shop that will likely be left to face the consequences.

"If you walk into court and you say the insurance company told you to put the part on, the judge is going to look at you say, 'Who put the part on? You did. Who bought it? You did. You're responsible,'" Chess says.

There are no easy solutions. Repairers typically can’t tell if an aftermarket part is up to snuff through a visual inspection, and there aren’t any particular standards or certifications related to structural parts that they can rely on. Only approximately 20 states have regulations on the books that cover equivalency or like-kind-quality in aftermarket parts.

According to Schulenburg, SCRS plans to step up its educational outreach to shops so that they are aware of these issues and can document when insurance companies have required aftermarket structural parts. “We need to get this information to consumers and to every shop across the country,” he says.

Diamond has been working with NSF International (www.NSF.org) to develop protocols and standards for aftermarket parts that include random testing and auditing by a third-party organization to help shops identify quality crash parts that meet OE specifications. The certification process should begin in the first quarter of this year.

“The suppliers and manufacturers should be developing products that won’t compromise safety,” Schulenburg says. “It’s really a responsibility we all share. We’ve identified a number of areas where the market has failed, and it's our responsibility to ensure it doesn’t continue.”

In the meantime, the OEMs (led by Ford) have continued to leverage their patent protections to restrict the manufacture of several types of aftermarket parts. O'Neal hopes that the industry will be able to self-regulate and promote the use of quality parts, while weeding out the inferior products.

"Without the alternative parts market insurer premiums would double and total loss numbers would be through the roof," O'Neal says. "Saying all aftermarket parts are bad is as careless as saying all aftermarket parts are good. The industry will not survive if the status quo is maintained with all segments pushing their own agendas. Insurers, shops and manufacturers need to find some common ground for the good of the consumer, themselves and the nation."