Application matrix
Application changes the requirement.
The same component named in two enquiries can be two different requirements. Six application contexts, and what each one changes about the information that turns out to matter.
- Contexts
- Passenger, commercial, fleet, workshop, business, replacement
- Format
- Comparison matrix
- Note
- No vehicle compatibility is claimed on this site
Why two identical-sounding enquiries differ
Two enquiries can name the same component and still be entirely different requirements. A workshop replacing an item on a car that is on the ramp this afternoon, and an operator planning a standing supply across a mixed fleet, need different answers even when the words in the message look similar.
This page sets out the application contexts that most enquiries arrive from, and what each one changes about the information that turns out to be useful. Read the row that matches your situation before you write your first message.
Six contexts, six different conversations
Find your row, then use the last column as the checklist for your enquiry.
| Context | What typically drives it | Identification considerations | Most useful to send |
|---|---|---|---|
| Passenger vehicles | A single vehicle, usually a specific seating position, often a replacement for an existing item. | The vehicle is available to photograph, so visual evidence is easy to gather and settles most questions. | Vehicle details, seating position, photographs in place and removed, any existing marking. |
| Commercial vehicles | Duty cycle and cabin layout rather than model alone; seating arrangements vary more than in cars. | Cabin configuration and mounting arrangement matter as much as the vehicle name. | Vehicle and body type, seat layout, mounting photographs, how many positions are affected. |
| Fleet vehicles | Standardisation across a known set of vehicles, planned rather than reactive. | The mix of vehicles in the fleet is the real subject, not any one vehicle. | Vehicle mix, positions per vehicle, total quantity, expected repeat interval, destination. |
| Workshops and garages | A job in progress with a customer waiting; speed and certainty both matter. | The old part is usually in hand, which is the strongest identification input available. | Photographs of the removed part on a plain surface, the vehicle, and the mounting point it came from. |
| Automotive businesses | Recurring component needs across varied vehicles — body shops, refurbishers, upfitters. | Requirements repeat in shape but vary in detail, so a reusable description format helps. | Typical vehicle range, typical quantities per order, ordering frequency, delivery destination. |
| Replacement requirements | An existing item that must be matched, whatever the setting around it. | Match quality is judged against the existing part, so that part is the reference document. | Multi-angle photographs of the existing item, its markings, and what it connects to on both ends. |
Scroll the table sideways to see all columns
Thinking about quantity properly
Quantity is where enquiries most often lose precision. “A few” and “some for the fleet” are not quantities, and neither is a number without a unit attached to it. The useful framing is: how many items, of which kind, for how many vehicles, over what period.
- Per item. How many individual units of each distinct thing you are asking about.
- Per vehicle. How many positions on each vehicle the requirement covers.
- Per order. Whether this quantity is the whole need or one instalment of a larger one.
- Per period. Whether it repeats — monthly, quarterly, seasonally — and roughly how consistently.
A fictional operator runs twelve vehicles of two types. Six vehicles need the front outboard positions addressed, and all twelve need a spare held. Written as “18 units: 12 for the front outboard position on vehicle type A, 6 held as spares, delivered together, repeating annually”, the requirement is answerable. Written as “belts for the fleet”, it is not.
This scenario is illustrative only and does not describe an actual customer.
Where it has to reach is part of the requirement
Destination is not an administrative detail added at the end. It affects how a quantity is discussed and how a conversation is structured, so it belongs in the first message.
Name the destination
City and country at minimum. If the goods need to reach more than one place, say so — a split destination changes the shape of the conversation considerably.
Say who is receiving
A workshop, a warehouse, a site or an end customer. It tells the vendor what kind of handover the requirement ends in.
Note any timing constraint
If there is a date the requirement is tied to, state it plainly. If there isn't one, saying that is equally useful.
Why this page names no specific vehicles
You will not find a compatibility list here, and that is deliberate. A published list implies that an item has been verified against a named vehicle. Restraint systems vary by variant, by market and by build, and asserting a match that has not been checked would be exactly the wrong kind of confidence in a safety-related purchase.
What this page offers instead is the structure for describing your vehicle and your context accurately, so that the question of suitability can be answered against your actual situation rather than against a generalisation.
Each stage removes ambiguity that the stage before it could not. A compatibility list would skip all four.
Tell us the context, not just the part.
Name the application, the position, the quantity and the destination. Everything else is detail that can follow.