OE Windscreens or Aftermarket
Discussion
whats peoples thoughts (if you have any) on this?
anybody thought they saved money buying the aftermarket screen but then regretted the penny pinching later on (poor fit, leaking, poor tint match or other issues) - are these screens made to the same sort of stiffness given that many cars now rely on the screen for added rigidity?
im not talking about screens claimed via car insurance policies but completely voluntary purchases where you have to bear the full cost and want to replace an old or badly scratched or pitted screen.
anybody thought they saved money buying the aftermarket screen but then regretted the penny pinching later on (poor fit, leaking, poor tint match or other issues) - are these screens made to the same sort of stiffness given that many cars now rely on the screen for added rigidity?
im not talking about screens claimed via car insurance policies but completely voluntary purchases where you have to bear the full cost and want to replace an old or badly scratched or pitted screen.
In my experience, aftermarket screens have been practically 100% identical to the OE unit, both made by Pilkington, both fitted perfectly. Seals were the same. Only difference was the VW one had a tiny VW/Audi logo on. Aftermarket screen was £130 including fitting. Maybe I was lucky? The glass man did say that some cars are a pig to get the screens seated correctly.
In my case it works out cheaper to just pay for a new screen once in a while than to pay extra each year for glass cover on my insurance. Autoglass/RAC massively inflate their prices- I was quoted nearly £400 to fit the same screen before I went to my local independent screen fitters.
Whether or not there's some minute manufacturing difference or the logo'ed up ones have tighter quality control I don't know, but it can't make any noticeable difference.
In my case it works out cheaper to just pay for a new screen once in a while than to pay extra each year for glass cover on my insurance. Autoglass/RAC massively inflate their prices- I was quoted nearly £400 to fit the same screen before I went to my local independent screen fitters.
Whether or not there's some minute manufacturing difference or the logo'ed up ones have tighter quality control I don't know, but it can't make any noticeable difference.
Riley Blue said:
Surely no one bears the full cost if they have windscreen cover on their insurance? There are ways to 'encourage' a screen to crack you know...
Maybe, but can I say two things?1. it'll be those folk who believe that such a claim (whether encouraged or not), wont have any impact on their next insurance renewal
- you with me now? 2. youve overlooked the actual question I was asking and by some considerable chasm I might add.
True it usually doesnt affect your NCB but you can bet your bottom dollar the rate used to calculate your base premium will be amended to show the "claim" so I prefer to just cut my insurer out of the loop and pay myself. Think about it too, when you windscreen Excess is £50, £75 or £100 its not much more to top that up yourself to the full cost anyway and you give your insurer no excuse to tweak your renewal up!
lufbramatt said:
In my experience, aftermarket screens have been practically 100% identical to the OE unit, both made by Pilkington, both fitted perfectly. Seals were the same. Only difference was the VW one had a tiny VW/Audi logo on. Aftermarket screen was £130 including fitting. Maybe I was lucky? The glass man did say that some cars are a pig to get the screens seated correctly.
In my case it works out cheaper to just pay for a new screen once in a while than to pay extra each year for glass cover on my insurance. Autoglass/RAC massively inflate their prices- I was quoted nearly £400 to fit the same screen before I went to my local independent screen fitters.
Whether or not there's some minute manufacturing difference or the logo'ed up ones have tighter quality control I don't know, but it can't make any noticeable difference.
cheers for that. im inclined to go along with those sentiments. i bet half the time youre paying for the logo in the screen! In my case it works out cheaper to just pay for a new screen once in a while than to pay extra each year for glass cover on my insurance. Autoglass/RAC massively inflate their prices- I was quoted nearly £400 to fit the same screen before I went to my local independent screen fitters.
Whether or not there's some minute manufacturing difference or the logo'ed up ones have tighter quality control I don't know, but it can't make any noticeable difference.
ToothbrushMan said:
Riley Blue said:
Surely no one bears the full cost if they have windscreen cover on their insurance? There are ways to 'encourage' a screen to crack you know...
Maybe, but can I say two things?1. it'll be those folk who believe that such a claim (whether encouraged or not), wont have any impact on their next insurance renewal
- you with me now? 2. youve overlooked the actual question I was asking and by some considerable chasm I might add.
True it usually doesnt affect your NCB but you can bet your bottom dollar the rate used to calculate your base premium will be amended to show the "claim" so I prefer to just cut my insurer out of the loop and pay myself. Think about it too, when you windscreen Excess is £50, £75 or £100 its not much more to top that up yourself to the full cost anyway and you give your insurer no excuse to tweak your renewal up!
One note of caution.
Perhaps it depends on the brand of car, whether the original 'manufacturer's logo' screen and aftermarket one are the same.
About a year and a half ago, we needed to replace the windscreen on a BMW E91 325i Touring - which has automatic headlights and a rain sensor. The screen was cracked and the insurance company covered a replacement with an OE BMW windscreen by Autoglass.
Autoglass fitted an aftermarket screen. Though it had all the sensors, the windscreen was significantly different in appearance.
It was nothing like as shiny as the BMW OE one and appeared to lack some kind of coating, making it appear darker, more translucent and giving it the appearance of being slightly too flat - less curved than the original. I assume this was an illusion due to the quality of the glass/coating, since the windscreen did actually fit.
As I say the windscreen did actually fit - but it did look like an aftermarket one – and quite obviously. It depends on how fussy you are - and whether the slight difference in colour bothers you.
We complained to Autoglass and in fairness to them, they replaced the screen with an OE BMW one the next day. I'm glad I insisted since the aftermarket screen niggled me every time I looked at it!
The insurance premium has not been affected by the new windscreen, in our case at least.
Perhaps it depends on the brand of car, whether the original 'manufacturer's logo' screen and aftermarket one are the same.
About a year and a half ago, we needed to replace the windscreen on a BMW E91 325i Touring - which has automatic headlights and a rain sensor. The screen was cracked and the insurance company covered a replacement with an OE BMW windscreen by Autoglass.
Autoglass fitted an aftermarket screen. Though it had all the sensors, the windscreen was significantly different in appearance.
It was nothing like as shiny as the BMW OE one and appeared to lack some kind of coating, making it appear darker, more translucent and giving it the appearance of being slightly too flat - less curved than the original. I assume this was an illusion due to the quality of the glass/coating, since the windscreen did actually fit.
As I say the windscreen did actually fit - but it did look like an aftermarket one – and quite obviously. It depends on how fussy you are - and whether the slight difference in colour bothers you.
We complained to Autoglass and in fairness to them, they replaced the screen with an OE BMW one the next day. I'm glad I insisted since the aftermarket screen niggled me every time I looked at it!
The insurance premium has not been affected by the new windscreen, in our case at least.
Whoops! I misread your question OP!
If I was buying a new windscreen and not claiming on the insurance, then price is going to be a much bigger factor!
I recently bought a new windscreen for my Jaguar XJ40 as part of its refurbishment. A new Jaguar Triplex heated screen was under £300 including the seal, so I bought that. Had it been £1000+ like a modern OE BMW screen can be at some places, I'd have gone aftermarket!! There are no strange coatings on it anyway!!
If I was buying a new windscreen and not claiming on the insurance, then price is going to be a much bigger factor!
I recently bought a new windscreen for my Jaguar XJ40 as part of its refurbishment. A new Jaguar Triplex heated screen was under £300 including the seal, so I bought that. Had it been £1000+ like a modern OE BMW screen can be at some places, I'd have gone aftermarket!! There are no strange coatings on it anyway!!
Depends on the car, a colleague had to replace one on an SLK recently and Mercedes say the windscreen is structural and needs to be an OEM fitted by them to be safe, but his insurance company would only pay for an Autoglass one. Some argument ensued, not sure if he managed to get the insurance company to pay for it in the end.
ToothbrushMan said:
lufbramatt said:
In my experience, aftermarket screens have been practically 100% identical to the OE unit, both made by Pilkington, both fitted perfectly. Seals were the same. Only difference was the VW one had a tiny VW/Audi logo on. Aftermarket screen was £130 including fitting. Maybe I was lucky? The glass man did say that some cars are a pig to get the screens seated correctly.
In my case it works out cheaper to just pay for a new screen once in a while than to pay extra each year for glass cover on my insurance. Autoglass/RAC massively inflate their prices- I was quoted nearly £400 to fit the same screen before I went to my local independent screen fitters.
Whether or not there's some minute manufacturing difference or the logo'ed up ones have tighter quality control I don't know, but it can't make any noticeable difference.
cheers for that. im inclined to go along with those sentiments. i bet half the time youre paying for the logo in the screen! In my case it works out cheaper to just pay for a new screen once in a while than to pay extra each year for glass cover on my insurance. Autoglass/RAC massively inflate their prices- I was quoted nearly £400 to fit the same screen before I went to my local independent screen fitters.
Whether or not there's some minute manufacturing difference or the logo'ed up ones have tighter quality control I don't know, but it can't make any noticeable difference.
RizzoTheRat said:
Depends on the car, a colleague had to replace one on an SLK recently and Mercedes say the windscreen is structural and needs to be an OEM fitted by them to be safe, but his insurance company would only pay for an Autoglass one. Some argument ensued, not sure if he managed to get the insurance company to pay for it in the end.
I got caught out by this - Marker Study (through Adrian Flux) only let you use their authorised glass company - one to avoid next year!Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff