"Frosted" (frostedbuns)
04/29/2014 at 13:13 • Filed to: None
0
21|
"Frosted" (frostedbuns)
04/29/2014 at 13:13 • Filed to: None | 0
| 21 |
So part of my recent car shopping has also included insurance shopping. I'd like to get a car that costs a little less to insure as well as to run in general. I'm currently insured by 21st century, under my parents name. Insurance on my XC70 is roughly 1500 every 6 months. I've been using Geicos quote...maker? to compare rates between cars because it's easier (for me) to figure out. Now, according to geico, I could have my XC fully covered for 460 bucks every 6 months while a base model Kia Forte is 800 every 6 months. Why is there such a huge difference? It's not like the base Forte is some speedy sports car, why is the quote double the price of my much bigger, more powerful, turbo'd wagon? And why are both of those quotes (which would be on my own plan) wayyyyyy lower than my rate with another company when I'm under my parents name? Are quotes representative of actual rates or would those rates skyrocket if I ended up switching companies?
Have some touring cars:
KusabiSensei - Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:19 |
|
Why is there such a huge difference?
Think of the kinds of people who typically buy a Volvo, and those who typically buy a Kia. The Kia folks tend to be in a lot more accidents on a statistical average than the folks in an XC70.
It's all based on actuarial science, plus your Volvo may be cheaper to fix than the Kia.
spanfucker retire bitch
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:19 |
|
Is the Forte you're looking at a Coupe model? That could be it. Anything with 2 doors is insanely expensive to insure, relatively speaking.
BigBlock440
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:20 |
|
The Kia new? Or are they both comparable model years?
|
Frosted
> KusabiSensei - Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs
04/29/2014 at 13:21 |
|
I spose the accident statistic makes sense, but there's no way this Volvo is cheaper to fix. Everything on it seems 10x more complicated than the Kia.
Tim (Fractal Footwork)
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:22 |
|
Maybe its the assumed type of person that drive it. A parent (the typical xc70 driver) is less likely to put their kids in a risky situation than a single person driving alone.
Nothing
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:22 |
|
All I can say is shop. Regardless of age, I've found wide variances in insurance with the same exact coverage. When I bought my Tundra to replace my XC, my insurance (wife/me) doubled with Liberty Mutual (up to $2000/yr for both cars). Called around and switched to All State, which has us currently at $1000k/yr for 3 vehicles. I still think the price is absurd for people in their 40s with clean driving records, but oh well.
Some reason, Geico always ends up being the most expensive for me. I know others where it ends up being cheapest. Keep shopping...if you any military history in your family, try USAA.
OPPOsaurus WRX
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:22 |
|
when i got my WRX i noticed they had it titled as a sedan. I had then correct ti and it actually lowered my insurance. Even though it is pretty much the same car, the hatch in considered a station wagon. Apparently only dorks drive station wagons and aren't as risky to insure.
|
Frosted
> spanfucker retire bitch
04/29/2014 at 13:22 |
|
Nope, base model 4 door sedan with a 4 cylinder NA engine.
|
KusabiSensei - Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:23 |
|
It depends. The Mercedes I owned has hideously complex engineering, but if you find all the right bolts, body panels come right off, and bolt right back in place.
Heck, when I talked to my agent, that E Class was the cheapest rate she had ever seen for someone my age.
Lekker
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:23 |
|
Wow those are low. I pay 900$ for 6 months of full coverage for my 370z nismo, 0 deductive for certain things, and increased caps in everything (increased by 100k in some and 200k in others), but I also have another car with them, (2012 Scion TC, I pay 110/month for that one) and my house. Do note, I am only 23 so rates are fairly high, but since I am married and had good student discount, as well as clear record, I pay less than my friend who is older and owns an 04 WRX.
So seems like it is based off statistics of the vehicle itself? I know in most cases they go by how much damage you can cause. Which I guess sort of makes sense, since Volvos are very good cars. I got quoted ridiculous numbers when I asked for coverage on a pickup/SUV. Their logic was, since the vehicle is bigger if it goes wrong, you can take more people out with you. but I'm not terribly sure anymore since your scenario depicts the opposite. I'd have to say in this particular one, seems like the stats of the car. Since the Forte is bought by younger people, it probably has a different bracket on its own. Like the BRZ, WRX, etc.
|
Frosted
> Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/29/2014 at 13:24 |
|
One of the questions on the quote form was martial status, which I selected single for. I'd assume that would factor into each quote? I could be wrong though and it might generalize the type of person driving each car.
E92M3
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:24 |
|
It all has to do with statistics. Generally speaking a volvo is less likely to be in a crash compared to a starter kia. Kia Fortes are typically driven by teens or young people (who take more risks coupled with less experience) , where volvos are typically driven by mothers in their 30's. On the flip side the volvo will be more costly to repair.
|
Frosted
> BigBlock440
04/29/2014 at 13:25 |
|
Yea, I did a 2013 Kia Forte base model sedan to my 2003 Volvo XC70. Is a newer car more costly to insure and an older one?
BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:30 |
|
2 big pieces to the insurance puzzle:
1st - you always pay for what other people with that car to with them. This is the same reason why a Corvette would be cheaper to insure for me than my Si is. Older, more repsonsible people drive Corvettes, even though it has over double the hp.
2nd - the damagability factor. While parts may be more expensive for the Volvo, the stronger structure may not need any much fixed as where the Forte is pretty much guaranteed to fold like a piece of paper against a larger object. (I like the car, it's just the way of compacts.)
|
BigBlock440
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:34 |
|
Depends on the value of the car, but a 2013 Kia is probably worth more than an 11 year old Volvo. Replacement costs would be higher for a newer car.
|
spanfucker retire bitch
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 13:43 |
|
Huh, I don't want to say. I have Geico and my premium is about half that every 6 months; and I have a 5-door Mazda3.
|
Frosted
> spanfucker retire bitch
04/29/2014 at 13:44 |
|
Door they count the 5 door as a wagon? I hear wagons are cheaper than sedans...
|
spanfucker retire bitch
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 14:23 |
|
I'm not sure. I think it's referred to as a 5-door sedan. Been a while since I looked at the classification on Geico.
yamahog
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 15:00 |
|
Yes. Are you looking at identical insurance packages too? Most new cars are financed, and require full coverage from the lienholder. An older car that's paid off does not require comp & collision, though it's still a good idea in many cases.
|
Frosted
> yamahog
04/29/2014 at 15:02 |
|
Yup, did both cars as being full coverage and both owned/paid off fully.
|
yamahog
> Frosted
04/29/2014 at 15:04 |
|
Woof. Time to start working all the discounts you can... good student, defensive driving course, safe driver, etc.