insuring 2005 forester xt

Can anyone explain to me why insurance is so costly on this car? According to my insurance company (usaa. usually tough to beat), it's $50 more per six months than a 2002 audi allroad or a 2004 toyota tacoma and it's $150 more than a 2003 ford explorer. i thought for sure it would be the cheapest of all these models.

in the break down, it looks like i'm getting killed on the collision premium.

any insurance experts out there?

Reply to
newman
Loading thread data ...

That's interesting, because I ended up dropping my coverage with USAA when I got my WRX...they quoted me ~$750/six months---Geico was less, and Progressive got my business with a quote under six for a year. I even called USAA back, to double check; gave them the other company quotes, and the lady said she didn't understand the spread, and would get back to me. She verified the USAA quote.

I'd been with them for over 20 years, no at-fault accidents, no not-at-fault accidents, no citations .

Maybe USAA just doesn't like Subies!

Reply to
CompUser

No, USAA simply is not competitive with automobile insurance prices, and I have continued to double check their rates for more than 15 years, never selecting them to provide coverage because their rates ALWAYS are higher than Geico's or my current provider (AMEX Assurance). They're usually right around the same as Progressive, which isn't very cheap either in my experience. We've got AMEX covering the Audi A4 and Geico covering the Subaru Legacy OBW. These two cars, Subaru and Audi, are expensive to repair, keep in mind.

Reply to
KLS

Actually, I'll call ya out on that---ironically, since I've bailed from them, for being *non- competitive* on Rus. When all the "price oriented" auto insurance campaigns started about five years ago, I began calling their competition...eventually, I began getting "USAA? Oh, I don't even have to look that one up...we can't touch them" responses from the call handlers...THAT is why I was incredulous about their rate for the WRX.

BTW, USAA has been one of the Consumer Reports' top-three rated insurors for ages. They always took care of me, including two non-fault accidents my ex was involved in...

Reply to
CompUser

Oh, I don't dispute the service from USAA, I'm just telling you that in New York State, where I live, their rates totally suck and have never been low enough to make my switching over to them economically worthwhile.

Reply to
KLS

It is because you are driving a "fast" car. They know the XT is really a sports car.

Reply to
Alan

It could be simply repair cost. I wouldn't be suprised at all if Subies had higher collision premiums just because if you gack up the car it takes more to fix it (and there are less places around fixing them).

I hated my other cars, but love my subie. So it's worth it to me for any higher repair and insurance.

Reply to
Sparky Polastri

yes. that's the conclusion i came to as well. the "t" in "xt" is what's killing me. actually, for a car that does 0-60 in 5.3 s, the rate is quite reasonable.

fyi, i shopped the VIN around on the car i'm looking at and usaa crushed the competition (crushed as in 33% cheaper). i'm sorry i doubted you, usaa 8)

now to begin the fax attack. anyone out there actually tried this?

Reply to
newman

That's easy to answer - 'TURBOCHARGED' it says to them you run the car hard & fast. You are more likely to speed & get in an accident.

At least that's how ~they see it :)

Reply to
PHIL

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.