Insurance Rates for young people

Get a homeowners or renters policy from the same company as the car is insured with. I quoted a 24 year old friend on a 7-8 year old Explorer. About $1800 annually. With a different company ,that does not write a stand alone auto policy, a renters policy and auto policy was about $1200 annually. Talk to an independent agent.

HiTempguy wrote: Not when 10's of millions of young adults are forced to carry their product. You're not doing a very good job at pulling my heart strings for those poor off insurance companies

Not pulling any heart strings. It's just factual numbers. The "forced" insurance is a function of the government, not the insurance company. Losses happen more than you think. So again, just math. Take that one loss I outlined. It would take 40 other policies without a single loss to offset it. And that's just for a smaller loss. If there were a catastrophic loss, such as a fatality, it could equal hundreds of policy premiums. The profit margins for an insurance company are not what you think. Insurance companies invest the money that they collect in premiums. That's where they make profit, they make little to none from just the premium.

Like I said, not a sympathy plea. Been in the industry a long time, know how it works. It butters my bread and allows me to feed my car addiction....

HiTempguy wrote:

Klayfish wrote: You gave them $2k, they paid out $75k. A losing proposition.

Not when 10's of millions of young adults are forced to carry their product. You're not doing a very good job at pulling my heart strings for those poor off insurance companies

Yeah, I want those same 10s of millions of people, who likely don't even have two paychecks worth in savings, responsible for financial restitution.

And I don't think the pleasure thing gets you much. My policy for example:

2011 Frontier Pro-4X, full coverage, $51/month
1990 Miata, "pleasure", state minimum liability, $29/month

When I had full coverage on my '91 318is a few years ago it was $55/month.

These are with State Farm in OK, as a 30 year old with no tickets/wrecks, good credit. And they are way cheaper for me

Listen to Klayfish, he knows, I use to be in claims. And I'm assuming he's an agent.

z31maniac wrote:

HiTempguy wrote:

Klayfish wrote: You gave them $2k, they paid out $75k. A losing proposition.

Not when 10's of millions of young adults are forced to carry their product. You're not doing a very good job at pulling my heart strings for those poor off insurance companies

Yeah, I want those same 10s of millions of people, who likely don't even have two paychecks worth in savings, responsible for financial restitution. And I don't think the pleasure thing gets you much. My policy for example: 2011 Frontier Pro-4X, full coverage, $51/month 1990 Miata, "pleasure", state minimum liability, $29/month When I had full coverage on my '91 318is a few years ago it was $55/month. These are with State Farm in OK, as a 30 year old with no tickets/wrecks, good credit. And they are way cheaper for me Listen to Klayfish, he knows, I use to be in claims. And I'm assuming he's an agent.

There's a bit of a difference between a 1990 model year 1.6 Miata and a 2004 Turbo Miata in the eyes of the insurance companies.

I was more pointing out the difference in price between my truck and my miata. Also my 318is used to cost more to insure, even though it would have a much lower value, than my current DD.

z31maniac wrote: I was more pointing out the difference in price between my truck and my miata. Also my 318is used to cost more to insure, even though it would have a much lower value, than my current DD.

Fair enough... Everywhere i'm finding shows my Miata is literally twice as much to insure as my Cherokee, though. While with my current agent, i was paying about $110/month for three cars before i added the Miata, at which point, it went up another $110 a month just for adding that single car.

In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:

You might be surprised how little they care once you are a married 40-something guy. My insurance never really goes much up or down, whether I am insuring an old SUV or a Porsche as my DD.

z31maniac wrote: Listen to Klayfish, he knows, I use to be in claims. And I'm assuming he's an agent.

Nope, selling ain't my thing. Been in the claims business all my career. Been an appraiser, adjuster, fraud investigator, claim manager, now as a consultant/specialist in auto claims. So I've been called every name in the book a million times over...

Alot has to do with the safety of the vehicle. Newer cars a worth more (more premium) but are sometimes safer (less premium)

Joey

Where do you live? Get something cheap, yet fun, and just carry liability. All vehicles should cost about the same for insurance if you only have liability. USAA ftw.

Klayfish wrote:

z31maniac wrote: Listen to Klayfish, he knows, I use to be in claims. And I'm assuming he's an agent.

Nope, selling ain't my thing. Been in the claims business all my career. Been an appraiser, adjuster, fraud investigator, claim manager, now as a consultant/specialist in auto claims. So I've been called every name in the book a million times over...

Ahh OK, forgive my assumption. Just remembering past references to having a nanny.

I am envious of all your rates. I have a 318ti and a C900 Turbo on my insurance.. both liability only (though the saab might go to full coverage.. it is that nice) and at almost 42 with no tickets or accidents in the past 5 years... $160/month here in NJ

mad_machine wrote: I am envious of all your rates. I have a 318ti and a C900 Turbo on my insurance.. both liability only (though the saab might go to full coverage.. it is that nice) and at almost 42 with no tickets or accidents in the past 5 years... $160/month here in NJ

Ouch, you pay more for two cars, than I pay for two cars, a wedding ring, and my modest house!

Buy an old car and stop paying for comprehensive.

Young drivers have more wrecks. Statistical fact.

Is the problem that the insurance company is taking advantage of you, or that you want to drive a new(er) car that is more than you can afford when you include the cost of the insurance?

Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: You might be surprised how little they care once you are a married 40-something guy. My insurance never really goes much up or down, whether I am insuring an old SUV or a Porsche as my DD.

Very true, the only thing that varies on my insurance is the collision, depending on how expensive the vehicle is to fix. Right now, it is very cheap for me, with a 99 Bonneville and 79 GMC C3500.

A co-worker, about 23 at the time, with a not so great driving record, checked into insurance for a 2010 Hayabusa (brand new at the time, $10,995 list price) with Progressive. They wanted $10,000 a year to insure the bike. They really didn't want him to have that bike. It was only about $600/yr for a cruiser bike for him though.

Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: You might be surprised how little they care once you are a married 40-something guy. My insurance never really goes much up or down, whether I am insuring an old SUV or a Porsche as my DD.

Very true, the only thing that varies on my insurance is the collision, depending on how expensive the vehicle is to fix. Right now, it is very cheap for me, with a 99 Bonneville and 79 GMC C3500.

A co-worker, about 23 at the time, with a not so great driving record, checked into insurance for a 2010 Hayabusa (brand new at the time, $10,995 list price) with Progressive. They wanted $10,000 a year to insure the bike. They really didn't want him to have that bike. It was only about $600/yr for a cruiser bike for him though.

81cpcamaro wrote:

Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: You might be surprised how little they care once you are a married 40-something guy. My insurance never really goes much up or down, whether I am insuring an old SUV or a Porsche as my DD.

Very true, the only thing that varies on my insurance is the collision, depending on how expensive the vehicle is to fix. Right now, it is very cheap for me, with a 99 Bonneville and 79 GMC C3500. A co-worker, about 23 at the time, with a not so great driving record, checked into insurance for a 2010 Hayabusa (brand new at the time, $10,995 list price) with Progressive. They wanted $10,000 a year to insure the bike. They really didn't want him to have that bike. It was only about $600/yr for a cruiser bike for him though.

More like they didn't want to pay out when he centrepunched a school bus at 190mph

rotard wrote: Where do you live? Get something cheap, yet fun, and just carry liability. All vehicles should cost about the same for insurance if you only have liability. USAA ftw.

Not true. Certain demographics driving certain cars are more likely to cause accidents. You might find it surprising what cars are actually cheaper to liability on. Here are my examples from recent experience. Just in terms of Liability coverage, for a single male in his mid 20's:

Miata < BMW M Coupe < Chevy Astro < Chrysler Cirrus < Honda Accord < < S2000 < 350z

That's right. Not surprising that the "ricer" cars had much higher premiums. But setting those aside, it was the boring appliance sedans that cost the most on liability coverage.

Seems like the least expensive cars are genuine enthusiast cars, but without a boy-racer or midlife-crisis connection (cars driven by guys trying to show off and prove their machismo). I figure it's because people with enthusiast cars care more about them and so tend to be more careful to avoid accidents because they are actively involved in driving and probably don't want their car to get hurt.

Remember, liability isn't about the cost of your car, it's about the cost of the probable damage you will do with your car.

^^^ I noticed that too. A Buick T-Type was cheaper for me to insure then a Civic.

Just my fleet:

Cheapest is my '06 Yamaha XT225, then '88 Chevy C1500, then my '94 Accord, then '94 Sentra SE-R, then '89 4Runner. All about the same liability coverage.

Salanis wrote:

rotard wrote: Where do you live? Get something cheap, yet fun, and just carry liability. All vehicles should cost about the same for insurance if you only have liability. USAA ftw.

Not true. Certain demographics driving certain cars are more likely to cause accidents. You might find it surprising what cars are actually cheaper to liability on. Here are my examples from recent experience. Just in terms of Liability coverage, for a single male in his mid 20's: Miata < BMW M Coupe < Chevy Astro < Chrysler Cirrus < Honda Accord < < S2000 < 350z That's right. Not surprising that the "ricer" cars had much higher premiums. But setting those aside, it was the boring appliance sedans that cost the most on liability coverage. Seems like the least expensive cars are genuine enthusiast cars, but without a boy-racer or midlife-crisis connection (cars driven by guys trying to show off and prove their machismo). I figure it's because people with enthusiast cars care more about them and so tend to be more careful to avoid accidents because they are actively involved in driving and probably don't want their car to get hurt. Remember, liability isn't about the cost of your car, it's about the cost of the probable damage you will do with your car.

It's been my experience that there is a negligible difference in liability rates for any of the cars I've gotten quotes on, with massive differences in full coverage rates. It could just be my state; it has low (too low in my opinion) limits of liability.

Mid 20's cars liability only:

LT1 Z28=FB RX-7=Rabbit GTi=Neon ACR=RX-8

Full coverage wasn't that bad on the RX-8. The Z06 is cheaper, but I'm also old now (29.) I did make the mistake of financing a Camaro Z28 when I was 20. Needless to say, I wasted a LOT of money on insurance for it.

rotard wrote: It's been my experience that there is a negligible difference in liability rates for any of the cars I've gotten quotes on, with massive differences in full coverage rates. It could just be my state; it has low (too low in my opinion) limits of liability.

Not so for me. Liability+comprehensive on my 328i is about the same as full coverage on the (7 years newer, faster, worth 2-3x as much) Volvo.

Insurance around here (Ontario, Toronto area) is pretty crazy: It's not unheard of to pay $225-300 per month/car with no history of accidents if you're young and male. A 22yr old coworker was recently quoted $500/month with two minor speeding tickets. I pay ~$100/month/vehicle.
$60/month: M3 convertible $110/month: Nissan Altima $118/month: TDI Golf

Apparently these are considered fantastic rates, but it hurts every month non-the-less.

Discounts are not that reliable. Let's say that you have a multi car insurance. still, don't you end up paying more as you are paying for 2 cars?

rotard wrote: It's been my experience that there is a negligible difference in liability rates for any of the cars I've gotten quotes on, with massive differences in full coverage rates. It could just be my state; it has low (too low in my opinion) limits of liability.

I'm not saying the differences were massive, but they were noticeable. I suspect CA has higher minimums than other places.

30y.o. with clean record, and a '95 Accord was definitely more to insure than a '94 Miata.

Back when I was 24, an S2000 or 350z would have been significantly more expensive than my M Coupe was. We're talking, over twice as much.