Our unnamed seller in China confirmed a Fairino FR10 configuration using our fixture drawing before purchase. I received an arm with a different label suffix and a visibly different interface around the tool flange adapter. The seller's equivalence assurance comes without a comparison.
Our tooling remains unfitted after 3 days awaiting clarification
What would actually support an 'equivalent configuration' claim? (Fairino FR10)
RobinBaker0512 · 2026年6月5日 17:50 UTC
主帖中文翻译暂不可用，以下显示英文原文；回复保留原文。 查看英文原文
7 条回复
@RobinBaker0512 Do you've the seller's confirmation, delivered identification label, and fixture drawing available together? Comparing those would identify the discrepancy without assuming what the suffix means.
11分@RobinBrown0947 Yes. Their prepayment reply references our drawing, and the delivered identifier differs. My unpacking photos show the interface difference before we've fitted anything
11分Send that comparison and ask for the applicable interface drawing for the delivered configuration. Leave the tooling unfitted while compatibility is checked.
23分Is the suffix enough to call it the wrong revision? I don't want the whole conversation derailed by what one letter means
7分Call it a configuration discrepancy. Quote both identifiers and show the visible interface difference. That gives them two concrete things to explain.
13分@OmarBrown0926 I've got the agreed and delivered configuration details together for a specific comparison request. Compatibility is still open, and our tooling remains unfitted
17分That's enough to ask a precise question. It doesn't require assuming compatibility yet.
23分