Apparatus-induced artifacts may invalidate standard spine testing protocols. Kinematic measurements may be compromised by the configuration of motion capture equipment. This study has determined: (1) the influence of machine design (component friction) on in vitro spinal kinetics; (2) the sensitivity of kinematic measurements to variations in the placement of motion capture markers. A spinal loading simulator has been developed to dynamically apply pure bending moments (three axes) with or without a simultaneous compressive preload. Two linear slider types with different friction coefficients, one with caged ball bearings and one with high-precision roller bearings on rails, were mounted and specimen response compared in sequential tests. Three different optoelectronic marker cluster configurations were mounted on the specimen and motion data was captured simultaneously from all clusters during testing. A polymer tube with a uniform bending stiffness approximately equivalent to a polysegmental lumbar spine specimen was selected to allow reproducible behavior over multiple tests. The selection of sliders for linear degrees of freedom had a marked influence on parasitic shear forces. Higher shear forces were recorded with the caged-bearing design than with the high-precision rollers and consequently a higher moment was required to achieve a given rotation. Kinematic accuracy varied with each marker configuration, but in general higher accuracy was achieved with larger marker spacings and situations where markers moved predominantly parallel to the camera's imaging plane. Relatively common alternatives in the mechanical components used in an apparatus for in vitro spine testing can have a significant influence on the measured kinematic and kinetics. Low-magnitude parasitic shear forces due to friction in sliders induces a linearly increasing moment along the length of the specimen, precluding the ideal of pure moment application. This effect is compounded in polysegmental specimens. Kinematic measurements are highly sensitive to marker design and placement, despite equivalent absolute precision of individual marker measurements, however marker configurations can be designed to minimize errors related to spatial distribution and system bias.