Aftermarket product Certification??

[smo]

With all this business about working on our own cars, making mods or fitting modified parts (as in not manufacturer standard fitment) is there a reason why we dont have rules demanding certification to avoid problems such as the broken trailing arms which are beign discussed.

Now i dont know the cost of the certification, but there are such services for BSI kitemarks for automotive products, or perhaps TUV certification....

Any thoughts? Should we insist products are tested, should it be limited to safety critical parts???

[disco_al]

IIRC that there is something in place - but only for large volume items. Small companies that sell less than x amount of a product don't require any formal testing - otherwise they would be out of business due to the costs of having things tested and approved before being able to sell them.

I am sure i will be corrected, but that was kicking around in the back of my head from somewhere....

[dollythelw]

would people be prepared to pay the extra for a TUV tested product??

last time I looked it wasnt a cheap process

[smo]

I'm sure its not Jez - i'm merely debating if its nessecary, if we want it or if its even feasable.

I think some kind of assurance its been tested on critical componants would be good, i understand that its an expensive process but perhaps manufacturers of small volume parts should at least do what Si of X-Eng (hope you dont mind me using you as an example!) does and back up his new products with facts and figures which are supported by engineering principles and real world testing, which he is not worried about sharing - cearly a sign of a man who takes pride in his work and understands what he is doing.

That of couse leaves the problems of dodgy welds by people and other manufacturing issues - not sure how to overcome them!

[pat_pending]

valid topic for debate. If si can test his products and still sell at a reasonable price what's stopping others?

[disco_al]

valid topic for debate. If si can test his products and still sell at a reasonable price what's stopping others?

greed? - low cost to produce coupled with high margins = £££

[smo]

valid topic for debate. If si can test his products and still sell at a reasonable price what's stopping others?

I think the thing to remember is the X-eng products are engineered and tested - not certified.

The only thing stopping others from doing the same is lack of knowledge and lack of willingness to do so in the rush to make a quick buck rather than product a quality and safe product.

[disco_al]

...and further to that, X-Eng products have an excellent reputation for quality - truly deserved from what i have read on here (and other forums) - based on real world usage and testing.

[Dave W]

In an ideal world, as a consumer, everything I buy will be suitable for the purpose, will fit my vehicle like a glove and will be made to the highest possible tolerances. Sadly though, also as a consumer, my budget doesn't extend to that type of testing so I have to make my own decisions on who I trust to do the work for me.

Yes, testing would be good but not if it makes the part I want unobtainable because it's either impossible or too expensive to produce. There are some companies that I wouldn't hesitate to buy "own brand" products from because I trust them and believe them to be ethical. There are other companies and individuals that I wouldn't trust to make a good ashtray.

The other problem with mandatory testing is that it stifles the creativeness of individuals who are capable, on their own vehicles, of creating one off items that are more than capable of doing the job. Most of the innovations in our sport don't come from companies, they come from individuals who produce and refine a design which a company then comes along and bases a product on. The key to the companies design being that they turn it from a one off custom design into something that can then be fitted to a standard vehicle with a minimum of effort.

[simonr]

I have looked at proper TUV testing & certification - but it seems that in the UK at least, everything is stacked against you. The testing has to take place in Germany and you have to be there for the duration. The process is also prohibitively expensive becides having to live in a hotel for a few weeks.

Unless it becomes mandatory - I don't think X-Eng will be going down that route.

Instead, everything gets tested (often destructively). You have to make some assumptions about how the said product will be used and test according to those. In my experience, the problem is more often with those assumptions than the product design. If you go down the formal testing route - the same is true. Even if it passes the test, they can still get you on the assumptions being wrong!

The best I can do is fix the problems as they crop up and hope that my liability insurance covers me if something dreadful happens!

Never mind the certification - you might be surprised how few companies have product liability insurance!

Si

[dollythelw]

if its fitted to a car Im driving I want to know who made it, if its fitted to a car Im racing - its made in house.

[Turbocharger]

With due respect Si, will your testing stand up in court? As you say, it's in the assumptions but how far does the call for due diligence on your part extend to considering how a part might be abused, overloaded, badly assembled etc? My concern would be that I produce a widget which has a safe working margin in my tests, but the court wouldn't see it that way when I'm stood in the dock, however much paperwork and computer simulation I can provide.

This isn't an attack on X-Eng; I think you're leading the way in your open and accessible testing by taking a scientific and measured approach to product development, despite the overheads, in a market where agricultural 'rule of thumb' dominates. I just wonder if you have gone (or can go) far enough.

[smo]

I guess thats where product liability insurance comes in - however providing evidence such as Si (X-eng) has is the onyl thing feasable at the current time without TUV/BS certification.

This is the point in quesiton tho, do we need more, should the law require a formal testing and certificaiton procedure?

[pat_pending]

I'm not sure we need more laws, we'll probably get them though, just give it time.

What we do need is for manufactures to be able to show that they have at least done some testing.

[q-rover]

would people be prepared to pay the extra for a TUV tested product??

last time I looked it wasnt a cheap process

It's the only way you can fit modified parts to your vehicle and get it through

the paperwork/ inspection check.

Either that or a letter from LR, Toyota, BMW saying that fitting yellow/ orange/ Blue springs is OK.

So yes.