My gixer (suzuki gsx600r) – 170kg – 104bhp 0-60 in under 4 secs 0-100 in under 8 seconds now only costs ¼ of the insurance of my 88 bhp, 1100kg Honda Civic which takes about 15 seconds to get to 60 and barely reaches 100mph lol!

Discuss.

I take it that both policies are the same (fully comp/TPFT).

Do you have the same amount of NCB on both policies ?
Is the declared value or mileage on the Civic's policy significantly higher ?

Quote from Bean0 :

I take it that both policies are the same (fully comp/TPFT).

Do you have the same amount of NCB on both policies ?
Is the declared value or mileage on the Civic's policy significantly higher ?

1 more year NCB on the bike. Both TPFT. Bike is £120 a year whereas car is about £480.

They have a hidden clause that entitles them to sell your corpse for research purposes of questionably legality at a much higher profit than you'd ever give them by the monthly fees. Of course the company is not a total arse so it gives some of that money back to its most profitable customers

it is to do with the engine size and your crash history , no crashes = cheap insurance , small engine = very cheap insurance


also insurance companys generally group cars by there engine size as well as if there turbo/supercharged and if you car is among the top 10 most stolen cars each year ( the civic is no 1 here ) your insurance will be a big quote

Probably the Civic has a high risk rating, because of all the ricers and teenagers driving and crashing them all the time. Your bike on the other hand is only the 600cc version which isn't favored by teenagers or street racers.

So more crashers in the type of vehicle = more expensive insurance.

Quote from geeman1 :

Probably the Civic has a high risk rating, because of all the ricers and teenagers driving and crashing them all the time. Your bike on the other hand is only the 600cc version which isn't favored by teenagers or street racers.

So more crashers in the type of vehicle = more expensive insurance.

It's not that civic. Its the one based on the Rover 400 floor plan usually driven by flat caps. It IS a cheap car to insure. I agree that 600cc sportsbikes tend to be riden more sensibly than 125 scooters etc.

My feeling is its simply the amount of injury/damage a car causes to third parties or third party property compared to a bike.

My old VFR 400 was just under £400 notes TPFT 28yrs old, garaged,

It would cost me more to insure an aprillia RS 125 LOL

Make sure no insurance companies see this thread. When the realise their insurance on the bike is cheap they'll hike the price!

It's probably because most people who crash their bikes aren't around to claim on the insurance.

TPFT is always a fair bit cheaper that fully comp' for bikes, since most accidents that are the rider's fault do not involve any other party.

That does seem very cheap, though. When you say 1 more year, how many year's ncb is that in total?

I think the main thing is bikes simply aren't capable of the same level of destruction as cars.

At the age of 22, I pay $20 to register and $90 to insure (minimal coverage) my 250cc dual-sport per year. A 600cc sportbike would be $173, while a 1000cc would be $202.

Quote from FOGlegsy :

My old VFR 400 was just under £400 notes TPFT 28yrs old, garaged,

It would cost me more to insure an aprillia RS 125 LOL

Exactly! Which is why it works out cheaper for me to buy and insure a restricted 600 (e.g.Kawasaki ZZR600) than a Honda Varadero 125.

I feel i'll probably go for the BMW F650 Funduro...

not only that but also when you get your car insurance it not only covers you but your passengers and that these days means alot, usualy when you crash a bike the only thing damaged or hurt is you and your bike

Quote from andybarsblade :

not only that but also when you get your car insurance it not only covers you but your passengers and that these days means alot, usualy when you crash a bike the only thing damaged or hurt is you and your bike

Damn good point that - never thought of that b 4

Quote from Gentlefoot :

It's not that civic. Its the one based on the Rover 400 floor plan usually driven by flat caps. It IS a cheap car to insure. I agree that 600cc sportsbikes tend to be riden more sensibly than 125 scooters etc.

My feeling is its simply the amount of injury/damage a car causes to third parties or third party property compared to a bike.

crash a Any bike at 20 into the back of a car or into a wall and 90 % chance your in a wheelchair since i know guy who crash a 250 cc bike ( not dirt bike ) the day he got it at 20 mph into a car we broke his neck and he had an helmet and all the leather gear on aswell :S

i think cars Should be cheap but depending on the type of car

Quote from theirishnoob :

crash a Any bike at 20 into the back of a car or into a wall and 90 % chance your in a wheelchair since i know guy who crash a 250 cc bike ( not dirt bike ) the day he got it at 20 mph into a car we broke his neck and he had an helmet and all the leather gear on aswell :S

i think cars Should be cheap but depending on the type of car

90%? I don't think so, and a car is a lot different to a wall by the way.
But in any case, I'm not sure what your point is. The rider is not a third party. If the guy in your story was at fault, then he wouldn't receive any compensation for his injuries from anybody, not even his own insurers - because third party cover only pays for injury and damage caused (by you) to other people (a third party) and their property.

Quote from Forbin :

I think the main thing is bikes simply aren't capable of the same level of destruction as cars.

At the age of 22, I pay $20 to register and $90 to insure (minimal coverage) my 250cc dual-sport per year. A 600cc sportbike would be $173, while a 1000cc would be $202.

Yeah that... Liability issues - and statistical data. Like to get insurance in the USA for a car, it's generally cheaper to insure a four-door car than a two-door. Also, I think in some states what COLOR the car is can be a determining factor in insurance cost as well.

LOL in three more years forbin, you'll only have to pay about 3/4ths of that.
I understand that full coverage on a Harley can be pretty expensive. something to do with theft coverage.

Simply because your life insurence covers the missing cost in your bike insurance

90bhp, 2003 Pug 307 2.0lt Diesel, 0-60 if you can stay awake, top speed, probably 100mph eventually, £300 fully comp

119bhp, 2003, Aprilia Falco, 1000cc V-twin, 0-60, probably around 4secs, top speed, about 165mph, £300 fully comp.

Go figure..........

110bhp - 1994 BMW 316i SE, 0-60 8.5sec, top speed 130mph, £1400 TPFF.

Tis my first car though

Had the same thing myself...insurance on a CBR 600 (fully comp) £84.00, insurance on a Civic 1.4i, £186.00 (also fully comp!)

Main difference in my case is that on the Civic it is insured for both me and Mrs B, whereas I wont let her within 200 yards of my bike

On both policies I have max NCB, and with no convictions or accidents I am surprised that the car insurance is so high!

when i was 17 i thought about getting a car or a bike but i decided to buy an FZR 600 insurance was 1500 but then when i saw my mates from school driving round in vw polos, clio's and novas i knew id made the right choice. a few years later and a few track days i got a job at donington giving lessons on trackdays

The insurance companies really aren't going to be bothered about the cost of a car/bike (within reason obviously) a second hand Golf, Focus or 206 is only worth a few grand, what it drives into is worth hundreds of thousands in (often ridiculous) liability claims, insurers are now looking at what 3rd party claims they're likely to get (hence why 3rd party/fully comp is hardly worth the price difference). The fact a bike is a fairly small light object that is likely to come out worse in a fight means it's less likely to result in 3rd party personal injury claims.

ajp's got it right there. I think it's all to do with the size of the claim that you're likely to make. Car v car - more people, more injuries, more items you're likely to make claims for. Car v bike - less people, less etc.

Either which way, I'm not going to complain. It's roughly the same for me to insure a 110bhp turbo diesel as it is a 175bhp ZX-10R, and I know which is more fun.