2015 Mazda Miata vs FR-S? To wait, or not to wait?

[Ganthrithor]

Originally Posted by chrisl

Yeah - I really was surprised when I learned how low my insurance cost was going to be when I came off my parents policy a while ago - I expected it to be a lot higher before I shopped around and got some quotes. Apparently, high level of education (masters degree), good credit score, and clean driving record really make a big difference. Here's the breakdown of my 6 month premium, for what it's worth...

Yeah, I'm really jealous

Here's what I was quoted for my '13 BRZ Ltd:



The Progressive policy with the stated-value clause seems pretty worthless, since the agreed-value coverage from AIG is basically the same price and you wouldn't have to lawyer-up to get your payout in the event the car is totaled. I received another quote from Progressive a couple of days ago that said it was for a stated-value policy, but they'd forgotten to change the premium to reflect that. Assuming that their first quote was accurate for a normal policy, even that would be ~$1800/yr (same general coverage breakdown as pictured here, just without the stated value clause).

Granted, I guess the coverage on these policies is a bit chunkier and they come with some more perks (like towing and rental reimbursement), but its still quite a difference, and you get that crazy-low comprehensive deductible, which is pretty nice.

[chrisl]

Originally Posted by Ganthrithor

Yeah, I'm really jealous

Here's what I was quoted for my '13 BRZ Ltd:



The Progressive policy with the stated-value clause seems pretty worthless, since the agreed-value coverage from AIG is basically the same price and you wouldn't have to lawyer-up to get your payout in the event the car is totaled. I received another quote from Progressive a couple of days ago that said it was for a stated-value policy, but they'd forgotten to change the premium to reflect that. Assuming that their first quote was accurate for a normal policy, even that would be ~$1800/yr (same general coverage breakdown as pictured here, just without the stated value clause).

Granted, I guess the coverage on these policies is a bit chunkier and they come with some more perks (like towing and rental reimbursement), but its still quite a difference, and you get that crazy-low comprehensive deductible, which is pretty nice.

Actually, mine covers towing as well (it's under the Emergency Road Service coverage), although I don't have rental reimbursement (I figured it was kind of pointless, since I have 2 cars and I'm the only driver, so if something happened to one car, I could just use the other). I also didn't need the medical, since I have pretty good medical coverage through my job. Your coverage limits are definitely a bit higher though, which is nice (mine is as high as they would go - 100k/300k was the highest option).

[DoomsdayJesus]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i have no problem admitting how much i like the miata. you keep bringing up the fact that he is 17 though and i dont know how that is the miatas fault. what other car is going to make that issue disappear regarding insurance rates? the miata is a cheap car to insure. the 17 year old is an expensive person to insure.

Here's a simple math lesson with relatively arbitrary values for you since you can't seem to let this one sink in.

X= 17 year old male
C= Typical miata buyer
Y= miata
Z= economy sedan with a decent safety rating
P= premium

X * Z = P
C * Z = 1/2(P)
X * Y = 3P
C * Y = 3/4P

Miatas are not expensive to insure for middle aged adults with decent records. They will be testicle-pain inducing expensive for a 17 year old male. Since insurance companies apparently have good track records with the majority of middle aged drivers in miatas, premiums are low.

Insurance companies do not have good track records with 17 year old males. Less so 17 year old males in convertible 2 seat roadster sports cars. They may have the lowest rates of all sports cars. That will not be reflected in his premium.

If you can't get that through your thick skull I'm just going to assume you're trolling. I'm done spelling out common knowledge of how insurance works to you.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by DoomsdayJesus

Here's a simple math lesson with relatively arbitrary values for you since you can't seem to let this one sink in.

X= 17 year old male
C= Typical miata buyer
Y= miata
Z= economy sedan with a decent safety rating
P= premium

X * Z = P
C * Z = 1/2(P)
X * Y = 3P
C * Y = 3/4P

Miatas are not expensive to insure for middle aged adults with decent records. They will be testicle-pain inducing expensive for a 17 year old male. Since insurance companies apparently have good track records with the majority of middle aged drivers in miatas, premiums are low.

Insurance companies do not have good track records with 17 year old males. Less so 17 year old males in convertible 2 seat roadster sports cars. They may have the lowest rates of all sports cars. That will not be reflected in his premium.

If you can't get that through your thick skull I'm just going to assume you're trolling. I'm done spelling out common knowledge of how insurance works to you.

its great that you can do math but i just dont think that it correlates to what happens in real life. i mean i understand the concepts but not the values. you can think im trolling and that doesnt bother me any. its just that i think its slightly odd that you call it common knowledge when there are quite a few people in this thread who disagree with you. the only "proof" was some article mentioning the miata in an example without any fact to go along with it.

sport cars can cost more to insure than boring people movers. i get that but i dont think you will "pay out the ass" on miata insurance.

[DoomsdayJesus]

Originally Posted by fatoni

sport cars can cost more to insure than boring people movers. i get that but i dont think you will "pay out the ass" on miata insurance.

You're right. I won't. A 17 year old male will.

[vangisback]

DoomsdayHaysus is a smart as a rock. Sorry but I refuse to try to make any sense of your logic.

Oh, btw, your "math" doesn't impress me.

[blackhawkdown]

I wish my parents would pay for my car and insurance. At 17, I was driving a 1989 Honda accord in 2002.

Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk

[cdrazic93]

when I was 17 I drove a 2000 toyota corolla LE, clean record (only had my license a year, learned on my dad's old '89 chevy truck) and my insurance was $200 a month.

Children under the age of 25 are expensive to insure, there have been multiple correlations found in studies and data analysis records of this happening. The thing is, is that these people have the sheer likelyhood of thinking about doing something more immature than those who are older. I'm only 20 right now and still pay $180 a month, still with a clean record and good grades.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/moneywis...surance-rates/

Clearly, its statistics. Men are more risky to insure and have to pay out from a crash, insurance companies don't like to pay out money. Thus they are going to charge a higher premium for men then women, especially younger men.

New cars and high schoolers don't go well together. The point of a first car is to get you from point A to point B and that's it, its supposed to be a cheap car. That way when you have the money later to afford a nicer car, you appreciate it more. More often than not coined by the term "humility", its a great trait to have that parents aren't allocating to their kids these days...

[Kilos6]

Your comment about insurance not mattering bc your parents are paying for it turned me off to your entire post. Do us all a favor and go drive a v6 camaro like all the other spoiled teenagers before you give the rest of us a bad name when you mod your frs with under glow. K thx.

[blackhawkdown]

at 17 i had a 1989 honda accord 5 spd. it took me 12 years to get to where i am now with all my cars and low insurance payments and income. dont rush it, you will though. i know. i was a teenager once.

[Frost]

I didn't even have a car at 18 let alone 16.

You rich kids.

I had my first car at 25 and that was a rusted out 1987 MR2 I bought for $800. Still love her, she don't love me though. Story of my life.

[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by Frost

I didn't even have a car at 18 let alone 16.

You rich kids.

I had my first car at 25 and that was a rusted out 1987 MR2 I bought for $800. Still love her, she don't love me though. Story of my life.

I got my first car when I was 19. Parents had nothing to do with it.

I was stationed in Monterey making Poverty First Class pay and it was a '98 mitsubishi mirage. 1.5l of fuel economy.

[VeeSe]

Not sure if this helps or not, but my NB Miata insurance is significantly cheaper than on my Accord. I'm 26 though.

[SurfAndSand]

Having driven all 3 model year Miatas, an S2000, and the FRS - the Miatas are "easier" to drive IMO; I don't think you imagined that. I also have to say I had more fun in the Miatas - it's probably a convertible thing.

That being said, I like my FRS, and I'm going to be thinking about which car to keep once the 2016 Miata comes out. If I could get my hands an an FRS RS1, I might go for that instead.

My advice for you - Do you need to carry more than 2 people or at least some stuff around sometimes? The FRS is your only choice then. Miatas will barely carry anything more than another person and a small load of groceries.

good luck to you - I mean it. Either car you choose are GREAT driving cars. You'll love them both.