autox
[Top] [All Lists]

insurance on [non?]performance cars

To: <autox@autox.team.net>
Subject: insurance on [non?]performance cars
From: "Mari L. Clements" <mlc4@psu.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 09:20:35 -0400
Justin wrote:
>Then again, insurance on this car [a first gen MR2] would probably be
through the roof for
>me...

When we were looking into buying our second gen MR2 and debating turbo vs.
NA (we went NA because I am the world worst left foot braker, as we
discovered autoxing my Shelby Charger), we did a fair bit of talking to
Allstate.  Neither the MR2 NA nor the MR2 Turbo were considered
"performance" or "hazardous" cars.  I thought this was interesting, but just
yesterday, I got an offer from a different insurance company that "was able
to offer me their very best good driver rates" because I met a variety of
criteria including "not owning a high performance car."

I don't know whether to count my blessings (and insurance savings) or be
insulted for my car, but I thought it was useful information for anyone
thinking about picking up an MR2--I can't imagine the first gen would be
hazardous/performance if the second gen is not.

Of course, depending on your insurance company, YMMV.  (Allstate also didn't
think the Shelby Charger was a performance model, which is why I switched
from State Farm.)

mlc
'91 MR2 NA


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>