Aftermarket, Salvage and Recycled Parts: What Seventeen Manufacturer Position Statements Say

Short answer: of the seventeen manufacturers with a published parts position, one prohibits non-original parts and fifteen say a version of no. One says nothing negative at all, and the verb is not decoration. Read the second table before you assume a document covers the part in front of you.

By Anthony Braswell for Quorum Industries LLC, The Autobody Directory · Updated 2026-08-23 · How this was written, and what the machine may not do

How this page was produced: Researched, drafted and checked with AI assistance under human direction and signed off by the named author, with the tables on this page built from a register by a script. How this site is written

The obvious assumption is that these documents all say "use OEM parts". They do not, and the difference costs money in two directions. A position that names only aftermarket parts has said nothing about a salvage door, and a shop that reads it as covering both is reading a blank as an answer. A position that names five categories and ties them to warranty is a different document from one that names one category and mentions no consequence.

These are manufacturer positions, not law. Nothing here says an insurer has to pay for an original part, and nothing here says fitting another one is unlawful. What each state allows an insurer to specify, and what it must disclose to you first, is a separate question with its own answer.

Seventeen documents take a position on parts that are not the manufacturer's own, covering 28 brands between them. Sixteen are in the OEM1Stop library and General Motors' is on gmparts.com. They do not say the same thing, and the difference is in the verb: one prohibits, eight do not approve, one does not support, six do not recommend and one recommends its own parts. Eleven of the seventeen tie it to warranty in terms. Every cell below is the document's own language, and the quote that carries it is in the section after next.

They are also not seventeen separately written positions. Four of them are one statement issued a second time under a sister marque's letterhead (Acura under Honda's, Hyundai under Genesis', Infiniti under Nissan's and Lincoln under Ford's), so seventeen documents are thirteen distinct texts. Where two rows read alike, that is why.

What each document actually covers

A position on "aftermarket parts" is not one position. These documents name between none and seven categories each out of the thirteen that appear anywhere in this topic, and a document that names one category has said nothing at all about the others. An absent category is not a permission. A manufacturer that names aftermarket and is silent on salvage has not allowed salvage; it has not addressed it, and reading the blank as an answer is the mistake this table exists to stop.

Structural work, and the parts singled out

Eight of the seventeen name structural components, and one of those (Audi) scopes the whole position to structural work rather than to parts generally. One (Rivian) raises named component families to a separate warning rather than leaving them inside the general position. Three of the seventeen carry no date of their own (Mercedes-Benz has none anywhere, in the text or the filename), and five are filed under a date the document itself contradicts. Where the two disagree the table shows the document's, and the gap is named in the section below.

The rows worth reading twice

General Motors is the one that uses the word prohibits. Its statement "does not approve and strictly prohibits the use of salvage, recycled/used, or non-Genuine aftermarket parts", and the phrase "and strictly prohibits" is set in red, twice. It then does the same for reconditioned parts in collision, structural or system-dependent repairs, and says damage arising from any of them is not covered under the new-vehicle warranty or any GM service plan. No other document we read in this topic uses that verb.

Audi is the only position in this topic scoped to structural work rather than to parts generally, and it is the only one that gives a physical reason. It names frame rails, apron assemblies, quarter panels, floor structures, bumpers, bumper reinforcement bars, A-pillars, B-pillars and body panels, and its stated concern is that the heat from cutting a part out of a donor vehicle costs high-strength steel, aluminium and carbon fibre their structural integrity. A reader looking for Audi's view on a non-structural aftermarket bumper cover will not find it in that document.

Rivian is the one that separates out named component families. Its general position is the weakest verb on the page, "does not recommend", and then it lifts SRS parts, meaning control modules, airbags, seats, sensors and seatbelts, and Driver+ ADAS parts, meaning radars, sensors and cameras, into warnings of their own. In this topic that is the only document that does it.

Mazda never says anything negative about any category. It recommends its own parts for mechanical, electrical, body panel, safety and structural work, names no alternative at all, and stops. Its category list on this page is empty because the document's is, and we have not filled it in from what the other sixteen say.

Honda and Acura are sixteen years old and still the published position. That matters less than the shape of their warranty sentence, which is the broadest in this topic: American Honda's warranty does not apply to any part "which is not purchased from an authorized US Honda dealer". Every other warranty clause here turns on what kind of part it is. Honda's turns on where you bought it.

Volvo and Kia each name exactly one category. Volvo says it does not approve of aftermarket replacement parts and stops; Kia says the same about aftermarket and adds a mechanism, that such parts "can result in a lack of proper fit and attachment connections", which "can prevent compliance with the repair procedures detailed in the Kia repair manuals". Neither document addresses salvage, recycled or reconditioned parts. That is not permission. It is silence.

Warranty is where this turns practical

Eleven of the seventeen tie the position to warranty in terms, and they do not all tie it the same way. GM and Ford write a flat exclusion: damage caused by the part is not covered. Volvo writes a conditional one, that use of aftermarket parts "can affect vehicle warranty, if the parts cause failures to other systems directly or indirectly". Subaru names the categories of part its warranty will not cover. Honda, as above, makes it about the seller.

The six that state no warranty consequence at all are not thereby promising coverage. They simply do not address it in the document, and a warranty question is answered by the warranty booklet, not by a position statement.

What this page is not saying

We are not saying an insurer must pay for an original part. A position statement is a manufacturer's published view of how its vehicles should be repaired. Whether an original part is owed on a given claim depends on the policy, the estimate and your state's rules on parts specification and disclosure, and none of those are on this page. Our unfair claims settlement practices survey is where the state-law side lives.

We are not saying that fitting an aftermarket part is unlawful. In general, it is not. Several states require your consent or a written disclosure before non-original parts go on the estimate, and that is a state-law question.

We do not claim the five verbs mean the same thing. They are the words the documents use and we have not flattened them. A prohibition and a recommendation are not the same instrument, and neither is a "does not approve" that names five categories and the same phrase naming one.

We are not claiming a blank cell is a permission. A manufacturer that names aftermarket parts and says nothing about salvage has not addressed salvage. The table shows what each document names, and nothing else.

We are not reproducing the documents. Each statement is its author's copyright. What is on this page is the position each takes, a short quote showing the coding is theirs, and a link. If a row matters to a file you are working, open the document.

In their own words

One short quote per document, enough to show the coding above is theirs and not ours, with a link to the document. Read the document, not this page, before you rely on it in a file.

American Honda Motor Co. (Acura), 2010-08-20, on Acura. The document

Other parts – whether aftermarket, counterfeit or gray market – are not recommended.

American Honda’s new vehicle warranty and replacement parts warranty do not apply to any part which is not purchased from an authorized US Acura dealer.

The Honda statement under the Acura letterhead, same date.

American Honda Motor Co. (Honda), 2010-08-20, on Honda. The document

Other parts – whether aftermarket, counterfeit or gray market – are not recommended.

American Honda’s new vehicle warranty and replacement parts warranty do not apply to any part which is not purchased from an authorized US Honda dealer.

Sixteen years old and still the current published position, which is the oldest in this topic. Honda’s warranty sentence is also the broadest in this topic: it turns on where the part was bought rather than on what kind of part it is.

Audi of America, 2018-12-04, on Audi. The document

Audi does not support the use of aftermarket, alternative, reverse-engineered, or remanufactured collision parts for the repair of structural components of any Audi vehicle involved in an accident.

The only position in this topic scoped to structural components rather than to parts generally, and it names them: frame rails, apron assemblies, quarter panels, floor structures, bumpers, bumper reinforcement bars, A-pillars, B-pillars and body panels. Its stated reason is specific too, that heat from the welders used to cut a part out of a donor car costs high-strength steel, aluminium and carbon fibre their structural integrity.

FCA US LLC (Stellantis), 2025-12-01, on Chrysler, Dodge, Fiat, Jeep, Ram. The document

FCA US LLC does not approve of the use of recycled, salvaged, aftermarket or reconditioned parts.

Two separate sentences, one for aftermarket and third-party and one for recycled, salvaged and reconditioned. The document points repairers at vehicle-specific procedures on TechAuthority.com and at genuine Mopar parts.

Ford Motor Company (Ford), 2025-10-01, on Ford. The document

Ford Motor Company original equipment parts are the only parts validated by Ford Motor Company to provide adherence to Ford Motor Company’s rigorous performance and safety standards.

Any vehicle damage or failure directly caused by the use of such parts or unauthorized repairs will not be covered or warranted under Ford Motor Company’s warranty or extended service plans.

The document nowhere writes the sentence "does not approve". It heads the section "Non-Approved Parts" and lists what falls in it: body panels, structural members, bumper reinforcements, wheels, safety restraints, fasteners, cameras and sensors. That is the most specific component list in the topic.

Ford Motor Company (Lincoln), 2025-10-01, on Lincoln. The document

Lincoln original equipment parts are the only parts validated by Lincoln to provide adherence to Lincoln’s rigorous performance and safety standards.

Any vehicle damage or failure directly caused by the use of such parts or unauthorized repairs will not be covered or warranted under Lincoln’s warranty or extended service plans.

The Ford statement under the Lincoln letterhead, same date and same component list.

General Motors, 2026-06-18, on Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Hummer, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Saturn. The document

GM does not approve and strictly prohibits the use of salvage, recycled/used, or non-Genuine aftermarket parts on Chevrolet, Buick, GMC, and Cadillac vehicles.

Any damage, failure, or non-performance arising from the installation or presence of non-GM (aftermarket, salvage, recycled, reconditioned, or other) parts, accessories, or modifications is NOT COVERED under the GM New Vehicle Limited Warranty or any GM service plans.

The only document in the library that says prohibits. The words "and strictly prohibits" are set in red, twice, and the phrase is used again for non-GM reconditioned parts in collision, structural or system-dependent repairs. Read from the page image: the PDF is a scan and no extractor could read it.

Genesis Motor America, 2023-04-17, on Genesis. The document

GENESIS MOTOR AMERICA DOES NOT RECOMMEND THE USE OF COUNTERFEIT, GREY MARKET, AFTERMARKET, IMITATION, RECYCLED COLLISION REPAIR PARTS, ALTERNATE OR OTHER NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT PARTS.

The longest category list in the topic, tied with Hyundai, and the two are the same document under two letterheads. It also addresses re-use of components taken off a collision-damaged vehicle, which most do not.

Hyundai Motor America, 2016-05, which is the date the library gives the file because the document carries none, on Hyundai. The document

HYUNDAI DOES NOT RECOMMEND THE USE OF COUNTERFEIT, GREY MARKET, AFTERMARKET , IMITATION , RECYCLED COLLISION REPAIR PARTS, ALTERNATE OR OTHER NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT PARTS.

No date appears in the document; the date shown is the one the library gives the file, which would make this the oldest Hyundai position in the corpus by nine years. The text is otherwise the Genesis statement under a different letterhead.

Infiniti Americas, 2016-09-15, on Infiniti. The document

INFINITI does not approve of the use of aftermarket, gray market, or imitation parts.

The Nissan position under the Infiniti letterhead. The dates disagree by about three weeks rather than four years, which is the more usual size of the gap.

Kia America, 2017-03 (the document gives a month, no day), on Kia. The document

the use of such aftermarket parts is not recommended by KUS.

The KUS New Vehicle Limited Warranty does not apply to any aftermarket part.

The dates disagree by four years: the text reads "As of March 2017" and the library files it as 5-4-21. The same gap appears on Kia’s scanning statement. Kia also gives a mechanism rather than a conclusion: aftermarket parts "can result in a lack of proper fit and attachment connections", which "can prevent compliance with the repair procedures detailed in the Kia repair manuals".

Mazda North American Operations, 2024-12-06, on Mazda. The document

Mazda North American Operations strongly recommends using Mazda Genuine Parts for all maintenance and repairs to mechanical, electrical, body panels, safety, and structural components (includes repairs due to collision damage).

the Mazda parts warranty applies only to Mazda Genuine Parts

The only manufacturer here that never says anything negative about any category of part. It recommends its own and names no alternative at all, which is why its category list is empty and why the coding stops where the document does.

Mercedes-Benz USA, no date in the document and none in the filename, on Mercedes-Benz. The document

Mercedes-Benz does not approve of the use of aftermarket or third-party replacement parts.

their use may cause other related components to not be covered under warranty should a failure occur

The only document in this topic with no date at all: none in the text and none in the filename the library gives it. There is no way to tell from the document how current the position is.

Nissan North America, 2016-06-20, on Nissan. The document

Nissan North America DOES NOT approve of the use of aftermarket, gray market, or imitation parts.

The dates disagree by four years: the document is headed June 20, 2016 and the library files it as 8-7-20. Which is current was not established. The position reaches mechanical, electrical, body panels, safety and structural components.

Rivian Automotive, 2026-04-28, on Rivian. The document

Rivian does not recommend the use of aftermarket parts on any Rivian vehicle.

Rivian does not recommend the use of any salvaged, used, or recycled part that is a Supplemental Restraint System (SRS) component.

Failures caused by an aftermarket part are not covered under warranty.

The only document in the topic that raises named component families to their own warning: one for SRS parts and one for ADAS parts, each set apart from the general position. Read from the page image: the PDF extracts thousands of characters in which four fifths of the tokens are single letters.

Subaru of America, 2021-08 (the document gives a month, no day), on Subaru. The document

does NOT approve of the use of recycled, salvaged, aftermarket, or recondition parts that may not be manufactured to the same specifications or tolerances as Subaru Genuine Parts.

Aftermarket or substitute structural, body, mechanical or electrical repair parts are not covered under any Subaru warranty or Subaru Added Security agreement.

The document gives a month and no day.

Volvo Car USA, 2022-02, which is the date the library gives the file because the document carries none, on Volvo. The document

Volvo Car USA does not approve of the use of aftermarket replacement parts.

Use of aftermarket parts can affect vehicle warranty, if the parts cause failures to other systems directly or indirectly.

The narrowest category list in the topic: aftermarket and nothing else. Salvage, recycled and reconditioned parts are not addressed, which is not the same as being allowed. The warranty consequence is conditional rather than flat, which is unusual here. No date appears in the document; the date shown is the one the library gives the file.

What we could not read, and what we had to render to read

Two of these documents defeat every text extractor we have. General Motors' is a scan: four pages, nearly two megabytes, and zero extractable characters. Rivian's is the harder case, because it is not a scan and does not look like one: it extracts several thousand characters in which more than four fifths of the tokens are single letters. Both were rendered to page images and read by hand, and both rows above say so.

General Motors' link answers a person and refuses us. On 2026-08-23 every link on this page was requested once. Sixteen returned a PDF. gmparts.com returned HTTP 403 to our request, and we do not retry around a 403. The link is still the document's home: when the file was harvested it returned 200 and we recorded its sha256, so what is on this page was read from that document and the refusal is to our fetcher alone.

Mercedes-Benz carries no date at all. Not in the text, not in the filename the library gives it. There is no way to tell from the document how current the position is, and we have not guessed.

Five documents are filed under a date the document itself contradicts. Kia is the widest gap, four years: the text reads "As of March 2017" and the library files it as 5-4-21. Nissan is close behind at four years. Where the two disagree we show the document's date and name the filename's in the row.

We have not read the underlying repair procedures. A position statement is not a procedure. Where a document points at a service-information system for the actual steps, we have not gone through that door, and for most of these manufacturers going through it needs a paid subscription.

This is one topic out of eleven. The same library holds separate statements on wheel reconditioning, airbags, glass, clearcoat, structural repair and more, and those are not compared here yet.

Sources

• The OEM1Stop position statement library, read 2026-08-22, 109 distinct documents across eleven topics. Sixteen of the seventeen compared here came from it.
• General Motors' parts position statement, hosted by GM at gmparts.com, read 2026-08-23 from the page images.
• The seventeen documents themselves. Every one is linked in the section above.
• 17 U.S.C. s 102(b), s 103(b) and s 107, read 2026-08-23 at uscode.house.gov, and US Copyright Office Circulars 14 and 33, read the same day at copyright.gov. These are why this page states positions and quotes briefly. Copyright never reaches "any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation".

Every claim in the tables is generated from data/oem/aftermarket-parts-positions.json, which records for each document the coding, the quote carrying it, the categories it names, the date and the link. The build refuses if a row coded "prohibits" carries a quote that only recommends, if a category appears that no document names, or if this page states a count the rows do not support.

Related

• Pre and post repair scanning: what fifteen manufacturers actually require
• Can a damaged wheel be repaired? What sixteen manufacturers say
• Salvage and recycled parts: what fifteen manufacturer entries actually say
• Salvage airbags: what twelve manufacturer entries say, and what two say about the law
• Unfair claims settlement practices, state by state

Corrections

• 2026-08-23. First publication.

General consumer information: not legal, insurance, or financial advice. Requirements, coverage, and practices vary by state, policy, and manufacturer.

More guides