Forums | MacLife

Luckily I am 38 and only paying $48 a month for my old 79 Chevy!!

dmceleney wrote:

Good Thing your not in Massachusetts, Where the state sets the rates for everyone, and most major insurance compansy will  not sell auto Insurance
Paying $1500 a year for a 2005

Assuming you're including collision coverage, that's not all that bad - he's paying almost $3300 a year.

PHUSMC wrote:

I'm still waiting for a reply from USAA.

When they quote you a rate, don't forget to include the check they will send you back every so often. When you buy their insurance, they set up a Subscriber's Savings Account which makes distributions to you. It's a mystery to me how often and how much to expect. But it's always nice to get a suprise check. Mine has usually been $75-$150.

I will also echo the comments about their good service. I have my home, auto, life, and personal article insurance with them. I've had claims for auto and personal articles and never had any trouble with them. I don't think they have rock bottom rates, but if you can't easily and quickly collect on a legitimate claim, what good does it do you to be paying low rates?

jondaris wrote:

Try cutting off your penis and see if that helps.

PHUSMC wrote:

I'm not "single" either, I'm engaged to be married next fall...

Heh.....

bcdynamic wrote:

This is kind of off-topic, but I was looking through my mom's old insurance papers on her 1977 AMX Hornet. Her annual insurance fee in 1977 was $50CAN. It was a brand new sports car, and she was a brand new driver. Not bad, eh?

AMC Hornet != sports car.

A friend of mine has an AMX and Ambassador convertible.  His dad had a Javelin, but sold it a few years ago because it was basically just taking up space in the garage.  He wouldn't drive it more than 1,000 miles a year because it was under 20,000 miles and still had the original tires.

Gatchaman wrote:

bcdynamic wrote:

This is kind of off-topic, but I was looking through my mom's old insurance papers on her 1977 AMX Hornet. Her annual insurance fee in 1977 was $50CAN. It was a brand new sports car, and she was a brand new driver. Not bad, eh?

AMC Hornet != sports car.

Indeed, I owned a '77 Hornet and it while it was "sportier" than the Chrysler Newport it replaced it was no sports car. It could barely pull its own shadow, turning was mostly on two wheels at speeds above a brisk jogging pace, and braking was noticeably improved by kicking open a couple of doors for extra drag.

It was a damn good off-road machine though. You could tell it was made by the people who made Jeeps. When I took the HornyWagon bush-hoggin' I could bury it in mud 6 inches up the doors and it would just grind its way out. Also, the floor in the back lifted up to reveal a compartment that would hold 4 cases of beer and the heater intakes would hold 3 26ers, so it was a good drive-in movie car. Fun, yes, but no sports car.

wellfleation wrote:

SonicSamurai wrote:

Im more suprised hes around 21 and only paying $80. I'm 24, no accidents, and paying $100+. What magical insurance company do you have?

Assuming a perfect driving record and eliminating all other intangibles, where you live determines how much you pay. Live in a city = higher rate when compared to a rural town. The reasons are obvious although not always completely fair.

This actually just changed here in Cal. The insurance companies have 2 years to comply with the new laws, according to the news. They can no longer raise your rates because of your zip code. It's been a long time coming. 

My insurance company (State Farm) already agreed to do it. I'm still waiting for my rebate check since my insurance went up when i moved.

Gatchaman wrote:

bcdynamic wrote:

Gatchaman wrote:

AMC Hornet != sports car.

Maybe it wasn't the most popular car back then, but it's still a sports car.

I used to have an AMC pacer.  It was barely a car.

Extreme flammability was the Pacer's only virtue.

justine wrote:

test wrote:

Extreme flammability was the Pacer's only virtue.

That was the Pinto.

The Pinto earned a reputation for flammability but the Pacer was also susceptible.

With the Pinto it took a fairly hard rear end impact to start a fire. Gas would then be forced through the fuel tank vent tube because Ford saved a few cents per car by omitting a check valve.

The Pacer's gas tank was formed with a slightly concave area on the top. Water and road salt collected up there and a big part of the top of the fuel tank would gradually disappear after a few years. In extreme cases the gas tank became an open topped tray of gasoline under the car, with fuel sloshing all over the place when the tank was more than 1/3-1/2 full. But the Pacer was an American car built in the '70's so most of them just quit running or fell apart before the fuel tanks could get that bad - it took 3 or 4 years even here in Ontario with millions of tons of salt on the roads every winter.

For what it is worth, Chevy Luminas (and other W-body cars) had similar (and many other) problems to the Pacer so it isn't like American auto manufacturers have learned anything since the 1970's.

Zetetic Apparatchik wrote:

test wrote:

justine wrote:

That was the Pinto.

The Pinto earned a reputation for flammability but the Pacer was also susceptible.

With the Pinto it took a fairly hard rear end impact to start a fire. Gas would then be forced through the fuel tank vent tube because Ford saved a few cents per car by omitting a check valve.

Didn't the doors also jam in the event of such a collision?

Probably. I don't recall having heard so but it does seem reasonable.

Sonic Dude wrote:

I was quoted by one insurance company an extra $200 because the car I'm driving was in an accident. Not me driving, not me in an accident, but the car being hit while 'parked.'

The 'reported accident' occurred in September of 2000, with my father 'driving.' Yet it was a 'parked' incident. That's interesting, and I'll list more reasons why:
1. The car is a 2002 Camry. It didn't exist in 2000. It was a mere thought in some engineer's mind.
2. My father did not take ownership of the car until 2005, nor did he drive it until then. Let alone the fact that it's hard to drive a 'parked' car.
3. I didn't even have my license until two years after the alleged accident, and the company, insuring me, wants to charge extra for an accident which was logically, as well as physically, impossible?

Needless to say, I went with a different company.

You can't just end your post like that! What did they say when you enlightned them?