Your Source for Up-To-Date News and Research on the Collision Repair Industry 

 

click here to subscribe to the FREE INSIGHT Editor's Desk News Alert Email

SUBSCRIBERS-ONLY
Today's News
INSIGHT This Month
INSIGHT Archives
Survey Center
Letter to the Editor

Business Tools
Subscription Information
CSI Reporting
Financial Analysis
IRS Audit Guide

Management/
Technical Info
Market Watch Rates
INSIGHT Inside this month's issue...

Feedback
Letter to the Editor

CAPA Responds to NCOIL: GM Reports Fail to Establish Significant Differences Between their Parts and CAPA Certified Parts

In response to a request from the National Conference of Insurance Legislators, CAPA has prepared a detailed report refuting allegations made in two reports General Motors presented to NCOIL dated November 2001 and February 2002.

Following is CAPA's statement:

In their November 2001 presentation to NCOIL, GM outlined alleged problems with 2 CAPA parts. When asked for detailed information, GM could not confirm to CAPA or NCOIL that the parts tested were, in fact, CAPA certified.

Regarding GM's February 2002 report on 10 CAPA parts, GM failed to establish any significant differences between their parts and CAPA parts. In a detailed evaluation of the report for NCOIL representatives, CAPA uncovered several problems with GM's report, including:

• The report implies that all of GM's 1999-2001 Grand Am parts are made the same way. That is not true. Review of data from independently tested GM Grand Am parts shows the following:
  • 71 percent variation in the number of welds among Grand Am parts
  • 129 percent variation in minimum weld size among Grand Am parts and even on the same part
• The report implies that the CAPA parts are inferior because they did not match the specific GM parts or specifications referenced in their report, yet an analysis of Pontiac Grand Am hoods in the market found:
  • 55 percent variation in number of adhesive patches on Grand Am parts
  • 105 percent variation in total surface area covered by adhesive on Grand Am parts

Absent from GM's report was any indication if the GM parts, in fact, met their own standards. Because CAPA regularly tests car company parts, significant data on GM parts has been accumulated in the normal course of certification. Overall, 65 percent of 467 GM parts vehicle test fit failed to meet CAPA's fit and appearance requirements.

At the recent NCOIL meeting in Boston, CAPA displayed a variety of problem parts, including GM's Grand Am hood with fewer welds than GM reported were necessary for the hood.

"Due to the implementation of our Vehicle Test Fit process, in which parts submitted for CAPA certification are actually mounted on vehicles and then compared to both the car company original part and service part, CAPA has several years of part data available," said Jack Gillis, Executive Director.

"This data shows that there are significant problems with car company brand parts. More importantly, however, because of CAPA standards, CAPA parts are equivalent to or better than their car company counterparts. We were surprised that GM chose to release such a report to the nation's state legislators," said Gillis.

The full CAPA report is available on its website or by calling (202) 737-2212.

©2002 Collision Repair Industry INSIGHT
All Rights Reserved

FEATURED
LINKS:

INSIGHT Supports the NABC!
Do You?