A FAIR RATE FOR COLLISION REPAIR
Are modern cars more complex? The quick answer is approximately 800 to 1 200 documents are needed for a new model type, depending on the vehicle manufacturer. Vehicles engineered way back in 2010 for example often required only 400 documents.
Every single vehicle starts with some form of body structure made from multiple parts which then sealed and painted. Once the Assembly is complete, many, many parts are fitted to the structure. In manufacturing each task is broken down into units of around two minutes, which is linked to the speed and length of the assembly line. The line moves in lock step from pressing panels through to just in time delivery trackside of everything from SRS airbags to seat sets.
Of course, collision repair is not manufacturing
So, whereas an assembly line copes with no more than two or three body styles, a collision repairer has to deal with almost anything turning up outside the business. Similarly, the assembly which absorbed some collision impact energy, the body, is buried beneath a whole gaggle of parts.
Getting to the core of the repair means taking of multiple layers of parts.
The more complex the vehicle, the more layers there are, the longer it takes.
Over the past decade each model range has had many possible powertrains added (hybrid, plug-in hybrid, pure electric) in addition to a host of other systems as well. To compound this, there are fewer big volume sellers, meaning more models chasing a given new vehicle market. This means less opportunity to hone great ways to remove entire sub-assemblies rather than component by component, and so less opportunity to save time.
While the Bugatti Tourbillon is super-fast, and super complex, compare it to a typical mass market HEV or PHEV vehicle. While the body can take more people and more luggage as well as accelerating without causing whiplash for the occupants, the front end is full to the brim with systems.
What can a ‘system’ include?
Let’s consider a base vehicle with a manual transmission and internal combustion engine powertrain. To comply with prevailing legislation and so be legal to sell, the tail pipe emissions need to be controlled. So, we shall add but one system of the many systems required to do this: EGR (exhaust gas recirculation). Here are the parts that need to be created for one sub-system.
• A revised exhaust manifold with a port for exhaust gas
• A revised intake manifold with a port to allow exhaust gas to enter it
• A valve to allow exhaust gas to be controlled
• A cooler to reduce the exhaust gas temperature entering the intake manifold
• Pipes / gaskets to link the two manifolds, the cooler and valve together
• Coolant hoses for the cooler
• Clamps, screws and brackets.
If we add serum dosing, particulate filter regeneration, an electric drive system in addition to the engine – each will attract a gaggle of features such as ‘EGR’ complete with all the bits to make it work. Every single part is in addition to our relatively simple starting point.
If that enhanced vehicle is in a collision, more parts need to be removed before we can reach the area of the body which absorbed the impact energy.
Is there a move to integration?
A favourite of modern powertrain design is to make the most amazing intricate pipe assemblies, which take less than a few seconds to fit in manufacturing. Yet, inevitably, these parts are in the way of other things in repair, can easily be damaged during impact or even in subsequent removal.
The old way was to make castings, for example, carry internal ducts to carry fluids. Tesla did this with the ‘super manifold’ which first appeared on Model 3, making a front strut tower cross brace perform several other tasks as well. In the battle of the European automotive business for survival, there is a move to make fewer parts do more jobs, so reducing assembly cost during manufacture.
The flip side is if those highly integrated parts which reduce assembly time during manufacture cause extra cost/complications during repair, it will make a bad situation worse.
The collision repair business needs to be able to keep vehicles alive for longer, so that we have a more prosperous long-term business. The issue is with pressure on vehicle values and complexity not only in the products but also the smaller number of any single model being sold, makes throwing away the vehicle more likely than less.
Re-thinking the hourly rate
Not all vehicles in collision repair are new, or even nearly new. The majority of the vehicle population has an average age close to 10 years old. An idea presented by Wayne Mason-Drust is based on pre-accident value, which could mean:
• A brand-new model/type needs proper research of all the repair documents, and that will scope how many systems need to be taken apart along with requirements for recommissioning them when the repair is complete. The residual value of the vehicle will be higher, so there’s more room to work before it becomes an economic write-off
• A 10-year-old vehicle, especially one that’s quite common, needs a refresher session to ensure the correct documents are at hand, and the full repair is scoped. However the research time will be reduced thanks to retained knowledge, there is less likelihood of needing to recalibrate things such as ADAS, so the allowable repair cost per hour could be lower
• This means a repairer will get the opportunity to work on a range of vehicles rather than being governed by the most expensive labour rate regardless of vehicle value. More repairs, more profit.
This is the start of a discussion.
How do vehicles presently going to salvage get the opportunity to be repaired instead. Yes, that will involve discussions about how much money a repairer gets paid per job.
By Andrew Marsh
