spc rear camber arms same as 350z?

jujubii

just cuz it fits and works doesn't mean the part was R&D'ed for the 370z. If or when the 350z part fails on your 370z, I'm pretty sure SPC wouldn't offer any warranty or support.

in the end, it's your car and your call. if you wanna save a couple of bucks... by all means.

cheshirecat

I don't know if you've actually done any rear end work on either platform, but the camber arm and toe bolt assembly are virtually identical between the two.

I'm not advocating substituting incompatible parts to save a few bucks. However, when you search on ebay and see "350z" arms for 65 bucks, then "370z" arms for 110 and THEY'RE THE SAME EXACT PART, you'd be retarded to just throw down the extra cash to make yourself feel better.

As far as the different part numbers, like I mentioned in my other reply- some vendors will make small changes to the unit to differentiate it from another functionally identical item, especially when one generation is phased out and an updated chassis is released to replace it.

It's the same thing Audi does with Bentley parts in some cases. Guess which one has the higher markup, yet come out of the same parts bin.

SPC, like any other company, is in business to make money. "Updating" a functionally identical part to keep it relevant during evolving product cycles is a great strategy and I hope it pays off for them. Apparently, they have some people that definitely buy into that kinda thing.

jujubii

judging by the pictures posted in the listing or what? lmfao.

you said, some original design manufacturers -not vendors- makes small changes to a unit to differentiate it from it's predecessor to make profit... 1) it's only in bad taste if it has no purpose 2) it's really only an allegation until proven.
Just because there was a small tweak made to an updated version for an updated platform doesn't mean it was meaningless. Conversely, you may question if it was meaningful, but you can't really know unless you did some sort of analysis or were a part of the design process. That's just something the consumer buys into. (For the record, I'm a spl fan).

Just because they look the same doesn't mean they are the same. Maybe they've done additional testing (or testing if at all as Sh0velMan speculates) on the new change, maybe they haven't. we don't really know; I think we can all agree that only they truly know (unless you or a whistleblower, I'm not aware of, has worked for them).

I'm not saying that you're 'advocating substituting incompatible parts to save a few bucks'; I'm sorry for your incorrect inference. I'm saying that you're 'advocating substituting potentially incompatible parts to save a few bucks'. I say potentially because spc has not given the green light on using an older version, spc has specifically listed a newer&updated model, and there isn't much proof for it's structural integrity (maybe functional integrity because some have expressed they have it installed and it 'works'). You can argue that there isn't much proof for the structural integrity of the predecessor to begin with, but I would say that, again, it's something (the branding) the consumer buys into.

But I digress... if want to use the 350z rear camber arms for the 370z, who am I to stop you? It's your car. Just dont expect much support from spc.