Diamond Standard claims their AMPs are equivalent to OEMs

A case of a fox watching the henhouse?

by Anne Koppel Conway

Memphis, Tennessee—In today’s collision repair industry aftermarket parts (AMPs) is a nuanced, complicated and definitely hot topic. The big question: Are AMPs equivalent to original equipment manufacturer (OEM) parts? And who says?

Some replacement parts have been found to be inferior to OEM parts in composition, performance and safety – some of that testing has been done under the auspices of Diamond Standard, an AMPs manufacturing group in Memphis.

Geoff Crane, the company’s business development manager, said that Diamond not only manufactures AMPs but has spent about $2 million over the past 5-6 years doing part crashworthiness and validation testing to prove that their parts actually perform in an equivalent manner to OEMs. The parts are subjected to material analysis. So, he believes, they are “assured of a material match on the front end of everything.”

Is the fox on duty?

Is this another situation of the ol’ fox dutifully keeping a hungry eye on the henhouse? Not according to Crane. He said the company uses an independent laboratory that is verifying the information.

But because some people in the industry “may be gunning” for the Memphis parts provider, he is reluctant to reveal the name of the testing facility. He finds it necessary to be “guarded” in what he says and “apologizes” for that.

“While we have been applauded by insurers for our position that critical safety parts are important to the proper functioning of a collision management system, such as the bumper system, and while we have demonstrated our commitment to equivalent quality in all respects, there are those in the industry who would disagree with our position – that lack of equivalency in quality and functional performance in replacement safety parts is an issue.” Crane said that Diamond Standard “would respectfully disagree” with the dissenters.

Insurers As a manufacturer, Diamond works directly with 15 insurance companies. “We know them all. We have quite a few insurers that support Diamond Standard parts within their certified parts programs.”

Some people, he said, are concerned that we are raising awareness [about AMPs], and that increased government regulations may not be good. But we think that as long as you produce parts that match themselves to the original parts, you shouldn’t have a care in the world.”

But do Diamond Standard’s parts match the original?

“Our tests are conducted according to Federal Standards of Crashworthiness, employing Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) protocols vs. the OEM part standards,” he said.

But not NHTSA protocol?

Diamond’s test results "have been reviewed by certain people in the industry,” said Crane, who did not divulge who the people were. “They believe we are on the right track.”

Achieving equivalency is important, Crane emphasized. “We are showing in our testing that there are milliseconds involved in the sharp deceleration [at the time of a crash], whereby a sensor can be delayed [if the right part is not installed on the vehicle]. It is troublesome for us.”

It’s troublesome for everyone.

“We are big boys, but a lot of people are taking shots at us saying that what we have [achieved] is neither worthy nor important enough. We are just puzzled by [this attitude]. It is a matter of conscience. I want to believe that our parts are every bit equal to OEMs.”

Loophole

Missing in all state regulations is the requirement for AMPs manufacturers to match OEM material or its material properties, leaving the door open to material substitution, which could result in substandard performing parts.

“We are of the belief that even though there may not be a regulation [regarding equivalency] in aftermarket parts, per se,” Diamond Standard’s position is, “Hey, you’ve got to match OE. Period.”

But do the AMPs manufacturer’s parts match the original equipment?

Oregon regulations

“You folk [in Oregon] have some pretty strict regulations out there on equivalency,” he said.

That’s true. Oregon requires certification by an independent test facility to show that AMPs are equivalent to OEMs.

Also, according to Oregon law, an aftermarket crash part is at least equivalent to the part being replaced, if the aftermarket crash part is the same kind of part and is at least the same quality with respect to fit, finish, function and corrosion resistance. (See Oregon laws, bottom of page 11.)

Crane asserts that Diamond Standard meets Oregon’s regulations.

But questions arise

How independent is the test facility Diamond uses? Who funds it? For bumper testing, for instance, does Diamond’s lab use the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA’s) crash worthiness test criteria?

Such as, for NHTSA’s Bumper Standard Test the test gets quite specific, for example:

During the perpendicular impact tests, the outboard edge of the test device is to be inboard of a line parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline and a parallel line passing through the corner impact contact point.
Pendulum Test Device shall be constructed in such a way as to maintain Plane A vertical within ± 0.25º and the impact line horizontal within ± 0.25º from release until the onset of rebound.

For a test to be in compliance there are even photographic procedures that must be met. (See drawing above.)

For complete test criteria, see: www.nhtsa.dot.gov/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/Vehicle Safety/Test Procedures/Associated Files/TP-581-01.pdf

For the State of Oregon: Has Diamond’s AMPs undergone the 500-hour salt corrosion testing, the metallurgical test for galvanization and fit and finish testing?

AMPs distributors

A representative of an insurance company told Crane, he recalled, that the rep had come from a meeting where a LKQ executive informed the insurers in attendance about “a value line, a low-end cost line of parts that are not ‘insurer grade.’” Crane told the Collision Standard, “You can read into that what you will.”

But is ‘insurer grade’ equal to OEM quality?

LKQ has adopted a policy, Crane said, that where Diamond has parts coverage for make/model/year, the parts distributor will only single source Diamond Standard parts. That’s an assurance on [the distributor’s] part that they stand behind what we represent,” he said.

That’s great, but it still doesn’t address the question of equivalency to OEMs.

Testing competitors’ AMPs

Along with their testing of their own products, their “independent” laboratory, Crane said, “has been testing the parts of off-shore competitors” (such as some parts coming from Taiwan). “These parts are of a different material and performance from both OEM parts and Diamond parts,” he said.

“In the low-end bumper systems, the energy absorber materials that are coming across the pond are made up of materials that do not match those of the OEMs,” he said.

As an example, Crane said, the material that Diamond’s competitors are using for energy absorbers in bumpers is polystyrene. “Think Styrofoam coolers, then you will have an idea of its structural integrity.

The material for our absorbers is a high-density polyethylene foam, which is subject to rigorous manufacturing process and compressed to form a very sturdy, heavy energy absorber – designed to absorb energy in a collision event. This material,” he said, “comes from a company in Japan where OEMs source their polyethylene.”

Diamond, Crane said, is “a critical supplier” that takes an OEM part and identifies the materials and their properties, such as thickness, shape and form. “We create our own tools and dyes.”

OEMs

In March, Toyota took the position, Crane said, that the absorber in their bumper should only be replaced with Toyota’s OEM part. Crane said that Diamond Standard “would say: OEM or Diamond Standard parts.”

But, to date, Toyota hasn’t added the ‘or’ yet. Neither has any other OEM.

No one can disagree with . . .

Crane believes there is “an implied warranty out there. When you go get your car repaired after an accident, you presume it is going to be restored to its functional position pre-damaged. That’s what everyone wants. That’s what I would expect.”

A customer might be told, he said, “Jack, here’s a part at half the price, you can save some money.” But what the customer may not be told is “that part may not perform in an accident. That’s the breakdown in communication. You get into disclosure laws.”

It may sounds promising, but there are still a lot of unanswered questions. Collision Standard was unable to get independent confirmation about the equivalency of Diamond Standard parts to OEMs, as well as verifying that the testing lab used is truly independent. Also, is Diamond’s test facility following crash test protocol outlined by the NHTSA and does it meet the State of Oregon’s equivalency criteria?

For the Collision Standard the verdict whether Diamond Standard’s AMPs are equivalent to OEMs is still out.