2002 LeSabre cheapest to insure

[Gene Brink]

Slow day at work and I thought it might be interesting to see how different cars compared to each other with regard to insurance cost. Three Buicks made the list below.

One of the prime reasons given for buying SUV's are that they are bigger and safer and as these ratings are based in part on injuries and cost of repair (I'm assuming that a bigger vehicle would not sustain as much damage as a smaller one and should cost less to repair) kind of thought there might be more SUV's on the list. Information was taken from http://www.insure.com/auto/leastexpensive.html if anyone wants to look for themselves.

Generally there is a mix of size/weight of the listed cars and I suspect the average age of drivers prone to buying the listed cars certainly makes a difference but I was surprised by the results anyway. Anyone have thoughts on why some SUV's in the same price range as the cars did not show up at the top of the list? (I trust it isn't solely because the cars are so undesirable that nobody ever steals one. Even new Buicks are desirable in my book!)

The top 10 are:

If saving money on car insurance is important to you, think about driving a more conservative car.

Find out the most expensive cars to insure

See crash results for more than 2,900 vehicles in the Car Crash Performance Tool

This advice might deflate your dreams of that little red sports car, but the 2002 Buick LeSabre tops the list of least expensive 2002 cars to insure according to the top three auto insurers in the country (State Farm, Allstate, and Farmers). The LeSabre is No. 1 based on its lowest claim record for injury, theft, and collision.

These 2002 cars can save you money on your auto insurance policy:

1. Buick LeSabre

2. Oldsmobile Silhouette

3. Honda Odyssey

4. Buick Park Avenue

5. Pontiac Montana

6. Mercury Grand Marquis

7. Buick Century

8. Chevrolet Venture

9. GMC Safari

10.Oldsmobile Bravada

While none of these cars may make your heart race, they do a better job of protecting you in an accident, and they aren't likely to get stolen from the parking lot. In fact, they have the lowest reported claims rates of injury, theft, and collision among 2002 cars on the market, according to the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI).

[Guest]

the list has nothing to do with how well they protect you in an accident, or how well they help you avoid one. those are engineering questions. It's based on claims history only, and is more about the actuarial basis of the owners than the cars themselves.

[Dave@Moon]

The same web site also states:

"The 10 most expensive 2002 vehicles to insure are:

Mitsubishi Montero Sport

Chevrolet Corvette Convertible

Lexus GS 430

Cadillac Escalade

BMW 7 Series

Honda Civic Coupe

Chevrolet Corvette Coupe

Mitsubishi Mirage Coupe

Toyota 4Runner

BMW 5 Series"

Except for the Civic and the Mirage, all of these vehicles are great big (presumably) tank-like vehicles as well.

What's the difference between the two lists? List number one consists entirely of soccer-mom vehicles and the darlings of the geriatric set. The clientelle of these cars would have a reduced accident rate relative to the mean if you held guns to their heads and made them all drive Kawasaki Ninjas. The second list are, consistently, the preferred vehicles of the younger set. They may not always be purchased by 20 year olds (i.e. Corvette, 5 Series), but they are the cars that people who want to drive like 20 year olds buy!

Quoting low insurance rates for a given type of car as a reflection of the car's attributes is like quoting lower death rates from Altzheimer's among smokers, the implied cause and effect are predicated on patently false assumptions.

[Guest]

I think the most expensive is a bit limited. Porsche should be up there somewhere. I know its not 2002 but just try and see what it costs to insure a 928

[Gene Brink]

Hmmm. Dave you have something but I do think that there probably is an inherent safety component in play here as well. Certainly typical driver and appeal of a given car affects the insurance rate, as do injury claims which I suspect mirror how well a given vehicle protects its occupants in addition to how they drive. Given that injury claims, I believe, would be a significant cost factor for the underwriter I can not imagine there not being some positive relationship to objective measurements like crash testing. Also, I've never seen an insurance table that did not charge higher premiums after drivers reach a certain age threshold (which, alas, the Buick profile fits) which would seem to offset the fact that older drivers generally drive slower, etc... I don't have any idea where these balance out statistically

I would not class some of the others as big and tank-like. The Montero is a mid-sized SUV, the 5 series BMW and LS430 certainly are not bigger than several on the cheapest list and the 4 Runner isn't very large either. I think this list is more likely to be expensive to insure because of high initial cost (for some), how often they are stolen with a fairly significant "how they were being driven" when an accident happened leading to injuries component.

It would be nice to fine a single source to compare vehicle performance (acceleration, cornering, stopping, etc) and cost to insure so one could ferret out the "sleepers" that must be there. Might surprise a few folks...

Gene

[gungeey]

The top ten list I think, will directly coincide with the top ten stolen cars...an exception being the Civic and it's younger driver base, Steve

[NTX5467]

Back in the later '80s and early '90s, there were many GM cars on the "low loss" list. When you looked at what they were and the demographics of the owners, it became obvious. Basically, they were the full size station wagons (Olds, Buick) and similar sedans (LeSabre, Delta 88). This was before GM started getting all excited about their higher carlines' customers age demographics. Those people didn't drive fast, travel to unsafe areas, travel during the wee hours of the morning, and probably parked their cars in their garages when they were home.

At that point in time, there seemingly were several vehicles from Buick, Olds, and maybe Cadillac on those lists. The higher volume Chevies and Pontiacs typically weren't there (except possibly the Pontiac Parisienne wagon) which had much higher "exposure" to potential loss for many reasons. GM dominated that list with their larger number of vehicle choices.

At the other end of the scale was the Olds Cutlass that usually came in on the "most desired"/stolen vehicle while similar Buicks and Pontiacs might have been well down on those lists (if they were there at all). Some Hondas were on that list too as were GM Chevy/GMC C/K series light trucks.

There are several ways to look at those lists too, but trying to read too much into them can lead to incorrect conclusions.

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[Guest]

Here's what happened to our family in June. I had just paid the insurance for another six months for our '98 Lumina LTZ. After going to our local Buick dealer, the numbers worked out ok and we bought a new LeSabre. We gave the information to our insurance man, and in a week here came a check from our insurance company! No change in coverage, but the LeSabre was $16 CHEAPER TO INSURE than a four year old Lumina LTZ! \O/ I drive the LeSabre just as hard as I did the Lumina. It does everything better.

[NTX5467]

Many times, the rates on older vehicles don't seem to decrease as it seems they should, so you might end up paying for coverage on a "new" car even if it's got a good bit of age on it. But, it could be that as the vehicle valuation decreases, the rates keep increasing so the payments stay pretty much the same. One goes up as the other goes down.

No doubt, the LeSabre operates better than the Lumina (with its basically middle '80s-type design, which was good for back then). I like the way the current gen LeSabre feels to drive and handle--kind of reminds me of my '70 Skylark Custom 350 2bbl in the way it winds the gears out for part throttle acceleration. I guess you've also noticed that it takes about 82mph to get to 2000rpm on the tack in 4th gear, yet still has no lack of low end performance due to that famous Buick Torque. In short, a very nice car!

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[Philippe Racicot]

A few days ago I saw a similar top ten list in a newspaper and the Le Sabre arrived second for Québec province in insurance costs. But here in Québec private insurances do not cover injuries as they are covered by the provincial government. Insurance costs here are related to theft or material damage but not to level of occupant protection offered by a car.

[Guest]

The Lumina pretty good for the era???? This platform was a collection of choices made more by purchasing than engineering, and helped get GM the quality reputation it "enjoys" today.

[NTX5467]

The Lumina was a solid product and a durable vehicle. Somewhat mundane styling and a name that should have been something else were the main issues, as I perceive it. Mechanicals were good but nothing earth shattering. The rear suspension with the transverse leaf spring (as the '84 Corvettes had) was innovative and practical, but was later replaced with struts.

NTX5467