McLaren Life banner
101 - 120 of 127 Posts
Progressive was the best I could find, state farm prices were absurd. hagerty same as everyone else stated as first time mclaren owner. About $3600 per year with progressive.
How did you get progressive to cover you on a personal policy? I was told they won't go over 150k and I ended up with a super expensive commercial policy with them at the moment for 22k/year!

I found a state farm rep who quoted me 3200/6m which I'm about to pull the trigger on.

The progressive Commercial policy is insane because (1) it doesn't cover you for any other vehicle so I have to keep a personal policy (2) unlike a personal policy which follows the vehicle, if you let someone else drive your car, they and the car are not covered.
 
McLaren's are one of the number one car insurance companies don't want to insure. Highest loss ratio in the USA? I think it's tied with the Ford Mustang!
Interesting,
How did you get progressive to cover you on a personal policy? I was told they won't go over 150k and I ended up with a super expensive commercial policy with them at the moment for 22k/year!

I found a state farm rep who quoted me 3200/6m which I'm about to pull the trigger on.

The progressive Commercial policy is insane because (1) it doesn't cover you for any other vehicle so I have to keep a personal policy (2) unlike a personal policy which follows the vehicle, if you let someone else drive your car, they and the car are not covered.
Could be because my 650 was just below the 150K mark and they were insuring on actual value not original cost, unlike statefarm. Not sure exactly but its a personal policy yes
 
My Mclaren is with Grundy but it's the second one I've owned. I had a Conti GT Speed with Hagerty but it was like pulling teeth becaause the car had over 650HP and I had to explain I've had more powerful cars before. The premium was 3X the premum of the Mclaren with Grundy.

I think Hagerty is probably better with a collection and not a single car. Mclaren has to be high risk becasue of the realtively low price makes it attainable for people that are buying their first exotic. People also put miles on Mclarens unlike Ferrari's that most of them sit and only hit the pavement once in a while for car shows. Yes I stereotyped but it doesn't mean I'm wrong.
 
As one insurance broker out of the 10 I called put it: too many rappers crashed them into their private jets.

The main issue is:
People also put miles on Mclarens unlike Ferrari's that most of them sit and only hit the pavement once in a while for car shows.
McLarens depreciate much harder than Ferrari and Porsche. So the mileage penalty for resale isn't as high (as a percentage). In my experience, they also tend to have younger owners (I'm 35, every other owner I've met in the DMV is sub 40). We tend to actually drive them in a spirited manner. Younger owners tend also not to have a large collection yet, so the 1 Mclaren gets a significant amount of road time.

Insurance, like any business, is in it to make a profit. They see the loss ratios statistics and many decide to not even play the game, they just can't get enough out of the premiums to justify the risk.
 
Discussion starter · #112 ·
As one insurance broker out of the 10 I called put it: too many rappers crashed them into their private jets.

The main issue is:


McLarens depreciate much harder than Ferrari and Porsche. So the mileage penalty for resale isn't as high (as a percentage). In my experience, they also tend to have younger owners (I'm 35, every other owner I've met in the DMV is sub 40). We tend to actually drive them in a spirited manner. Younger owners tend also not to have a large collection yet, so the 1 Mclaren gets a significant amount of road time.

Insurance, like any business, is in it to make a profit. They see the loss ratios statistics and many decide to not even play the game, they just can't get enough out of the premiums to justify the risk.
I’m sub 60 but the cop who pulled me over probably thought that I drove like a sub 40!😆 It’s great that some of y’all younger crowd can afford a $400k+ car. I’m just a working schmuck and in my 30s-40s, my entire paycheck went to feed the wife and kids.
No one is in the business to lose money, no doubt, and the house always wins. We just don’t see major auto insurance companies go tits up. With every change in regulations, natural disasters, operating cost increases, etc., the cost is passed onto to the consumer without fail.
 
Serious question...why would anyone not do agreed upon value for a 350-400k car? Is there something I'm missing? if you get rekt, and their insurance only covers xyz, or you paid 400k cash now the resale value is 250k etc.
Many reasons.

First, the agreed value only comes into play if the car is stolen or totalled. The chances of that are extremely slim and more than likely never going to occur.

Second, Let's assume you bought the car used and paid 320k for the car. If the car is stolen or totalled the ACV may be 275-300k (just giving an approximate as an example). Is the difference between the increase in premium for agreed value worth the difference in ACV value. If you have a loan or lease, than it may be worth it or necessary but if you paid cash than it may not be.

Third, triggering the total loss on an agreed value car is different than triggering the total loss on an ACV car.

Fourth, you need to pay attention to what is covered, not covered, specifically excluded and deductible. on an agreed value policy. Most of these policies are not standard policies that would be regulated by the state and as such may have odd exclusions. A lot of agreed value polices have a 2% deductible or some other amount (different than your standard $500 deductible). Using your example at 400k that is a 8k deductible. Add that to the increase in premium you pay and is it worth it? You could go 10 years without your car being stolen or totalled and if you add up the increase in premium you paid and the deductible, you may have been better off with a ACV policy.

Insurance is all about risk tolerance. Some people self insure, Some people are fine with ACV and others want the safety net of agreed value. It is really dependant on your personal tolerance level.

Believe it or not, a large percentage of homes over $10 million have no homeowners insurance. Those people would rather not pay huge premiums and can afford to absorb any losses. Conversely a homeowner with a 500k home may over insure as they would rather have the protection and they couldn't afford to absorb any loss, should something occur.

Hope that helps some.
 
Fourth, you need to pay attention to what is covered, not covered, specifically excluded and deductible. on an agreed value policy. Most of these policies are not standard policies that would be regulated by the state and as such may have odd exclusions. A lot of agreed value polices have a 2% deductible or some other amount (different than your standard $500 deductible). Using your example at 400k that is a 8k deductible. Add that to the increase in premium you pay and is it worth it? You could go 10 years without your car being stolen or totalled and if you add up the increase in premium you paid and the deductible, you may have been better off with a ACV policy.
While I wont say that this does not exist...In my inquiry with 6-8 different insurers earlier this year, and shopping for an AGV policy, not a single one used this deductible structure. I have seen this in homes (ie a Flood policy or wind policy, etc...) but I have not encountered that yet on a car.

The devil is always in the details, but In my shopping, the AGV policy was was within hundreds of market policies. My data points are low because I was shopping for exclusively an AGV policy, but I received some market policy quotes by chance because some companies like State Farm did not offer AGV for my situation, and they were definitely not cheaper.

I think an often overlooked factor, is that with AGV you can incorporate the cost of acquisition, such as shipping the car across country, PPI, cost to get up to par, etc...in addition to sales taxes or other aspects for the total cost of purchase...not just the vehicle itself. Something to think about when you consider the pros & cons
 
While I wont say that this does not exist...In my inquiry with 6-8 different insurers earlier this year, and shopping for an AGV policy, not a single one used this deductible structure. I have seen this in homes (ie a Flood policy or wind policy, etc...) but I have not encountered that yet on a car.

The devil is always in the details, but In my shopping, the AGV policy was was within hundreds of market policies. My data points are low because I was shopping for exclusively an AGV policy, but I received some market policy quotes by chance because some companies like State Farm did not offer AGV for my situation, and they were definitely not cheaper.

I think an often overlooked factor, is that with AGV you can incorporate the cost of acquisition, such as shipping the car across country, PPI, cost to get up to par, etc...in addition to sales taxes or other aspects for the total cost of purchase...not just the vehicle itself. Something to think about when you consider the pros & cons
Hagerty uses it and right on the dec page for agreed value policy. It would NOT be on an ACV policy. (Since they are non-standard auto policies they can do funky stuff. Such as excludes flood. Normal policy can't do that in Florida as not an approved form).

Another important consideration is most carriers will not let you mix and match agreed value and ACV. That is why I had multiple policies. I wanted agreed value on some and not others (I eventually got rid of all agreed value and went with just ACV).

Here is an older policy when I had hagerty.
Image
 
101 - 120 of 127 Posts