Car insurance for 21yo on a GT-R?

[longblackcoat]

Nanook said:

Rtype said:

It really is amusing how that post is littered with all of the things that you say are within my posts.

You really are ignorant, rude & typical of the demographic we often come across. But that's fine, it happens all the time and its often this group, that point the finger elsewhere when the st hits the fan.

RB Will & Walm both make decent points, without being the stereotypical PH director prick that you are coming across as. I fully agree with RB regarding a young lad who has grown up around the vehicles and make that argument regularly. Christ, Straw-man argument we are scraping the barrel, its an insurance thread, hence the question, not a RWD vs 4WD thread.

Yes, RWD cars are more challenging to drive on the limit (which these would need to be), but, a Boxster or a Elise isn't more difficult to drive than a GTR and certainly in any slip on a day to day driving basis, the GTR is far more likely to bite you in comparison to these vehicles.

Whatever makes you feel better, one of us has been playing high and mighty, trying to introduce some sort of class divide here, and making the snide little digs, I'm just calling it as I see it. You've read a few posts where I disagree with something you said, and seem to think you know a lot more about me than you really do. Typical PH director prick? Because you don't like what I'm saying? Read back through the crap you're spouting about becoming a billionaire and me putting my money where my mouth is, and have a think about who's really acting like that here.

Besides, I am a Director. No goatee though.

You still don't get the point I was making though, and it's hard to tell if you're being intensely stubborn so you can remain, in your head, flawless, or if you really are that dumb.

I've driven a Boxster many times. And an Elise a good few. And a GTR a couple of times.

And on our pot-hole ridden damp roads, my experience tells me that the electronically magical 4WD car is the easier one to drive. You seem to disagree. That doesn't make you correct though.

In fact, most people seem to disagree with your assertion. But the 0-60 times back you up, so you must be right I suppose.

Here's your problem; he's the insurance broker, you're not.

And given that he's one of very few people who can get insurance sorted for a young person on a GT-R, perhaps in the real world his market knowledge counts more than your impassioned assertions.

Personally, I'd want to see evidence of daily use of a high-performance, high-power car, that can get you into trouble really quickly. Because in the real world, the occasional driver of an insanely accelerative car is more likely to have a shunt than the person who has daily experience of something close to it in performance terms. Because the average 21 YO is going to stick the car into launch mode and try to beat 3.0s 0-60, or at least that's the presumption the broker has to make, and that's when things go horribly wrong.

It say seem utterly unreasonable (because hey, we're all driving gods on PH) but that's just the way it goes. A big, heavy, uber-performance car that attracts a certain type of driver is going to be insanely hard to insure, particularly for an occasional use 21 year old male. Always been the case, and statistics says that it's not going to change.

I agree that a Boxster seems like a reasonable stepping-stone in terms of performance, and if I were a broker I'd look at someone who had one as a daily driver as someone I might add as an occasional driver on a GT-R. But then I'm not an insurance broker.

[Rtype]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

The fact is, you reacted to someone 'rubbishing' your claims and offered you a (as you like to call it) 'Strawman Argument' to which, in the complete context of this actual topic, rubbishes it, you reacted and for one who doesn't like 'snide digs' unleashed them yourself. You didn't like that, you got all bolshie, you especially didn't like the demographic one.

Regarding the millionaire/billionaire side of things, its not bullst, it is fact you would be either of those if your opinion was viable, but there is a reason it isn't. Find me anyone who could translate that opinion into fact & ill back it, any investor would. I for one would rather give up work and enjoy my cars.

Many people disagree, but many people also agree, including the owner of a GTR, but that's the nature of cars and what people actually define as experience and what quantifies it. I wouldn't take opinions online as gospel to the extent I feel your preaching is trying to make me do.

But I'm glad your two time trip in a GTR around a track gives you that confidence. Predictable end to your statement, a flippant comment, but as you are preaching, your BHP per ton/two times driving a gtr/ 3 times lotus elise/RWD VS 4WD argument must mean you are right and all must bow to your greatness. The issue I'm having, morally, is that stats don't match that sermon(other than the rwd vs 4wd).

[TwigtheWonderkid]

OzzyR1 said:

My first car was a 1.0 Metro, my second was a twin-turbo Supra (still aged 17).

Not dead as far as I know, didn't even prang it.

But the young drivers with performance cars who did prang it and who are dead (and there are plenty) aren't around to post about it.

Derrr!

[Vyse]

If Max Verstappen can handle a F1 car at 18, your son should be fine.

[walm]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

First thing I did was to change those tyres.
Jesus.
Here's a scale picture approximating the level of traction through even the tiniest puddle:

[walm]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

T1Rs and kept the Yokos for summer.

[Rtype]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

I almost did the same.

But then realised that you have it in for every person in insurance based on your recent situation. Pick that one out yourself did you?

And my retort, to your pretty rude statement, which sums you up is simple: If you were unquestionably right, as you seem to think you are instead of just ignorant. You would be retired, not a structural engineer.

Enjoy your bubble!

[Captain Muppet]

If insurance is based on data, which it is, and insurers won't insure you on a GTR despite having owned and not crashed an Elise (which is apparently the case), then where is the data on unacceptably high GTR claim rates from previous Elise owners coming from?

[Vaud]

Captain Muppet said:

If insurance is based on data, which it is, and insurers won't insure you on a GTR despite having owned and not crashed an Elise (which is apparently the case), then where is the data on unacceptably high GTR claim rates from previous Elise owners coming from?

Mass market insurance is done from lots of data and lots of algorithms.

As I understand it specialist insurance is much more of a dark art.

Comparable insurance groups maybe? Or some clusters of risks to create more of a statistical base plus a further uplift to cover the statistical uncertainty?

(I am not an insurer)

[deeps]

Thanks for the replies

Out of curiosity, how do you go about proving what previous cars you've had experience in?

when looking at experience he's driven an audi tt 1.8 turbo (225) quatro for the last 2 years. His road sense is very good and he's been taught a lot by me, not that that counts for anything in insurance terms, but it counts a lot to me.

He wouldn't be driving the GT-R hard with me sat in the car (I'm not a masochist) but you don't need to drive it hard to enjoy it, the double clutch transmission is sheer joy, and he's already had experience and 'feel' for the car on a private disused air strip.

Any guesses on how much a quote would likely be ?

[SidewaysSi]

walm said:

RB Will said:

I dont think 99% of people on here could drive a Boxter or Elise anywhere near 9/10th let alone in a short space of time. Most people cant even drive a gokart that hard.

I'm agreeing with Nanook. A GTR may have a lot of easily deployable power but it doesnt mean it is going to kill any younger drivers.

I dont see why a drivers age means they wont be able to handle something.

Some really good points in that.

I think I wrote the 9/10ths thing wrong, sorry.
I meant 9/10ths of THEIR ability not the abilities of the car - so I totally agree with you!
We all know that feeling of getting into a familiar car, feeling it is like a second skin and being able to push it close to our own comfort levels and perhaps a little beyond.
I just think you get to that point relatively quickly in the Elise and Boxster, whereas it takes longer with the perhaps less "chuckable" GTR.

However, I disagree slightly on the age thing.
It is obvious from the stats that younger people crash more.
And not only that but they tend to have less powerful cars too.
So while obviously some guys will be perfectly competent (latest F1 winner!) the AVERAGE will be less able to handle it.
That is a simple matter of statistics.

A GTR is a lot easier to drive near or at the limit than an Elise, particularly one on P Zeros and crap geo. Likewise, a Caterham in the wet can be a handful at 30mph.

2 tonnes and a lot of electronics is hard to beat. Of course that gives people the feeling of invincibility...

[Tuvra]

SidewaysSi said:

A GTR is a lot easier to drive near or at the limit than an Elise, particularly one on P Zeros and crap geo. Likewise, a Caterham in the wet can be a handful at 30mph.

2 tonnes and a lot of electronics is hard to beat. Of course that gives people the feeling of invincibility...

Like I mentioned earlier and also touched upon by many other posters here. The GTR will get you in trouble when the inevitable "watch this" moment happens. Launch control off the lights, gaining speed far quicker than you expected and not having the ability to brake in time, reaching crazy speeds before even realising it etc. These would be the real dangers for inexperienced drivers.

Your as likely to crash a Boxster as you are a Corsa in my opinion. The Elise maybe a little more difficult than a Boxster but the GTR has FAR, FAR more potential to bite the driver on the arse with very little warning. The speed of the GTR will essentially out-speed the brain of the driver and by the time the brain realises it, its far too late. The speed involved then means this is a major incident, where an Elise could lose the back end at 30mph and spin out unharmed and unscathed (the car).

As mentioned, I had a 4.5 Cerbera at 18 and T350c at 19 so I'm pretty experienced at getting it wrong on the road due to inexperience. The two incidents I had with the cars involved travelling too fast and really struggling to stop the cars in time, in a GTR with the weight and the extra power (and capability to reach speed) I think this would be far worse even with the modern brakes/tyres.

[Bradley1500]

deeps said:

Thanks for the replies

Out of curiosity, how do you go about proving what previous cars you've had experience in?

when looking at experience he's driven an audi tt 1.8 turbo (225) quatro for the last 2 years. His road sense is very good and he's been taught a lot by me, not that that counts for anything in insurance terms, but it counts a lot to me.

He wouldn't be driving the GT-R hard with me sat in the car (I'm not a masochist) but you don't need to drive it hard to enjoy it, the double clutch transmission is sheer joy, and he's already had experience and 'feel' for the car on a private disused air strip.

Any guesses on how much a quote would likely be ?

I've been in a similar position recently trying to secure insurance as a named driver for temporary usage on a Pontiac Firebird Trans Am myself and my dad are jointly buying.

Obviously this is no where near the value and doesn't have the speed potential of a GTR but being a 6.6 V8 it proved difficult to find anywhere that would quote for me (21 YO, 4 years driving experience, 3 years NCB).

I eventually got a quote through HIC (Herts Insurance Consultants - https://www.hertsinsurance.com/) for £1400 including an agreed value of £20,000 and an extension to drive other vehicles on a third party fire and theft basis - an extension quite rare for someone my age.

They also asked for previous experience of similar cars or simply performance cars. I mentioned some of my previous 'performance' cars: multiple Honda Civic Type Rs, BMW 328i, Mitsubishi GTO and classic cars: Mercedes 350SL and Triumph Spitfire. So far they haven't asked for any proof, just mentioning these seemed to be enough to secure a quote.

They were fantastically helpful so as long as the car is all good this weekend we'll be insuring through them.

If you haven't already they may be worth a call.

[StottyEvo]

Try Admiral, a friend of mine insured his at 20yrs old for £1100 with 0 ncb.

[J4CKO]

My youngest sons mate has a brother who drives a 911 Turbo and has gone halves with his dad on a GTR, he is only early twenties.

[Vaud]

StottyEvo said:

Try Admiral, a friend of mine insured his at 20yrs old for £1100 with 0 ncb.

Interesting. I just tried that as I was sceptical - and got £1800 which surprised me (without raising the excess, etc).

[StottyEvo]

Vaud said:

StottyEvo said:

Try Admiral, a friend of mine insured his at 20yrs old for £1100 with 0 ncb.

Interesting. I just tried that as I was sceptical - and got £1800 which surprised me (without raising the excess, etc).

Thank you for trying before calling bullst! I've had to prove this one a few times before on here. Insurance for young lads on high performance cars is relatively quite cheap.

[ashleyman]

Thankyou4calling said:

For some it will be!

However, I wonder what the premium would be for say a 19 year old Premier League footballer in a Lamborghini Aventador, bearing in mind his passengers will also likely be footballers, models etc.

They also seem to have quite a few cars on the go.

There must be specialists who deal with this.

Young singers etc too, Harry Styles the guy in one direction (I don't know his age) has a really interesting fleet of cars. His premium will be pretty hefty though I'm sure easily affordable.

You'd be surprised! Anything to do with footballers or celebrity in general always works out more expensive.

When I was getting insurance, I phoned a broker and when they saw my job (Commercial Photographer) they specifically asked what I take photos of, when I said lifestyle and sports for advertising then then asked do you work with footballers? I said yes and my insurance went up!

They said that there was a higher risk to my car due to paparazzi or fans who might be around the car cause damage or I might run them over or injure them.

I cannot even begin to imagine how much an actual footballer would have to pay considering they're a 'star' and will have people chasing them everywhere.

[ZOLLAR]

StottyEvo said:

Vaud said:

StottyEvo said:

Try Admiral, a friend of mine insured his at 20yrs old for £1100 with 0 ncb.

Interesting. I just tried that as I was sceptical - and got £1800 which surprised me (without raising the excess, etc).

Thank you for trying before calling bullst! I've had to prove this one a few times before on here. Insurance for young lads on high performance cars is relatively quite cheap.

I've seen £1,200 on an Aventador for a lad in his early twenties.

[StottyEvo]

ZOLLAR said:

StottyEvo said:

Vaud said:

StottyEvo said:

Try Admiral, a friend of mine insured his at 20yrs old for £1100 with 0 ncb.

Interesting. I just tried that as I was sceptical - and got £1800 which surprised me (without raising the excess, etc).

Thank you for trying before calling bullst! I've had to prove this one a few times before on here. Insurance for young lads on high performance cars is relatively quite cheap.

I've seen £1,200 on an Aventador for a lad in his early twenties.

Said friend ran a quote on an Aventador and got £800, he's gone for a 650s though at £1300. Although he now lives in an incredibly low crime area.