Just wanted to share my pleasure and pain with you all...

The new 2016 R Coupe is actually less expensive for me to insure than my other new car, a 2015 Subaru WRX. Same coverages and deductibles...

I'm not sure if I should be happy the Jag doesn't cost more, or upset the Subaru costs too much...

 

That makes sense. The WRX sells disproportionately to hyper-testosteroned 20-somethings, who like to pretend to be WRC racers on the street. They tend to hit a lot of things as a result. Whenever I see WRX around here, I'm immediately on-guard after taking a look at who's in the driver's seat.

It's purely an actuarial necessity. It is a fun car.

 

My insurance agent quoted a price that was:

--almost identical to the 2010 ZR1 that I just sold last summer
--and slightly more expensive ($100 yr) than the 2015 M4 I traded in

 

I'm assuming the primary drivers listed are different for each vehicle?

 

My policy doesn't care about primary drivers, just all licensed drivers in the household. It's me and my 17 year old son. (yeah, ouch that hurts!)

He's very happy with the WRX. I doubt he'll drive the F-Type unless he's taking me home from someplace that caused me to not be able to drive... Bar, Doctor, or something like that.

 

WRX are notorious. Most accidents, most tickets, etc.

 

Same goes for me. My 04 Sti is $141 per month as my primary vehicle and the 16 R Coupe is only $94 per month as the pleasure vehicle. Even my 06 Subaru Legacy was more expensive at $104.

 

My first quote for insurance was insane, about double what my Land Rover was costing. But my broker got me cover with a specialist super car insurer which ended up being about the same.

 

Check with your insurance agent. Often they automatically assign the highest risk car to the highest risk driver. If the 17 year-old won't be allowed to drive the Jag, you might save some $'s.