Audi A3 Thoughts

jamesfreddie said:
When my insurance on the 1.6 A3 will be £2k a year or a 2L will be £8k i don't really think getting a car 4 years older will really cover the increase :p
Click to expand...

In that case i'd stick with the polo, thats some mad insurance bills, i thought mine was bad lol.

Bear it a couple of years then you'll be able to put that amount of cash into a much wider array of cars, chopping and changing now, then again in a couple of years is only going to lose you more money
 
adolf hamster said:
In that case i'd stick with the polo, thats some mad insurance bills, i thought mine was bad lol.

Bear it a couple of years then you'll be able to put that amount of cash into a much wider array of cars, chopping and changing now, then again in a couple of years is only going to lose you more money
Click to expand...

Agreed. Wait it out, and in a couple of years you'll have lots of options available to you. Right now you're clearly compromising a lot just to get something "better" when it's not really the best use of the budget.

I had my first car for 5 years, the time flies by.
 
TheVoice said:
Agreed. Wait it out, and in a couple of years you'll have lots of options available to you. Right now you're clearly compromising a lot just to get something "better" when it's not really the best use of the budget.

I had my first car for 5 years, the time flies by.
Click to expand...

I had a couple of changes, but my first car that i owned and drove in my name i had for 5 years.

If you keep saving in a few years time then 10k+ is going to buy you a really nice motor.
 
I find it very hard to believe that the same car with 20% more power quadruples the insurance cost. The remarks about what is and what isn't insurable sound highly dubious IMO
 
iaind said:
I find it very hard to believe that the same car with 20% more power quadruples the insurance cost. The remarks about what is and what isn't insurable sound highly dubious IMO
Click to expand...

Its not down to power, insurance groups are a mystery to anyone not in the business.

For example-
Bmw 320i coupe ~170bhp group 31
Bmw 325 saloon 218bhp group 30
Alfa 159 3.2 4wd 266bhp group 29

Its a combo of crash statistics, power, cost to repair, percieved "sportiness", postcode and only a minor factor of the actual driver. Plus they do love to rip the hell out of young drivers.
 
adolf hamster said:
Its a combo of crash statistics, power, cost to repair, percieved "sportiness", postcode and only a minor factor of the actual driver. Plus they do love to rip the hell out of young drivers.
Click to expand...

So in which case, why is insuring my 310PS S3 going to be cheaper than insuring my 136PS 2.0TDI A4? It appears to be a complete lottery, that even the industry can't fully explain.

Best thing to do is simply to get quotes on a myriad of vehicles, you may end up being surprised.
 
Crash stats. More morons drive the 2l diesel so probably have higher crash rates.
Round here every chav and yummy mummy wannabe has one in white.
 
paradigm said:
So in which case, why is insuring my 310PS S3 going to be cheaper than insuring my 136PS 2.0TDI A4? It appears to be a complete lottery, that even the industry can't fully explain.

Best thing to do is simply to get quotes on a myriad of vehicles, you may end up being surprised.
Click to expand...

Presumably the reason is s3's tend to be bought by petrolheads, and ironically petrolhead statistics for accidents are lower than you'd think because they pay attention to driving and dont wanna crash their cars.

Whereas a more "standard" car is going to be bought by regular folk who may crash more often.

Its like the peugeot 306 turbo is much pricier to insure than a tdi fabia, for the same size class and general power, because the current fashion for chavs taking 306's cutting the springs out then driving like the clappers until their ruined suspension puts them through a hedge.

Its a bit like the dashcam near miss statistics are filled with idiots in 7 seat mpv's completely overestimating their cars performance, whereas a petrolhead in a sports car is going to know their cars limits more than the average joe
 
What amuses me about insurance costs is the generic "targets" that drop insurance costs so much. If i get insured on a Fiesta ST on Thursday (364 days since i passed my test, but grouped into 'under 1 year driving experience') it will cost ~£780 (still very reasonable!!). If i get insured on it on Friday (365 days since i passed my test but grouped into '1-2 years driving experience') it will cost ~£620 :D

As for car choice though, the best option if insurance is a factor is to quote for tens of cars with tens of other options changed, named drivers, mileage, car overnight location etc etc... Even start date can change the quote! I have hundreds of comparethemarket emails with quotes ranging from £500 to £3000+ for various cars and options from when i was buying a car last and year now
 
Nope, comparing absolute cheapest with absolute cheapest. I even rang round some brokers as well as using the obvious insurance companies, owners-club discounts, comparison sites.
 
I know its not down to power, or engine capacity, or even really insurance group. But I absolutely dont believe that going from a 1.6TDI A3 to an identical 2.0TDI A3 quadruples the price - not consistently across the board anyway.
 
iaind said:
I know its not down to power, or engine capacity, or even really insurance group. But I absolutely dont believe that going from a 1.6TDI A3 to an identical 2.0TDI A3 quadruples the price - not consistently across the board anyway.
Click to expand...

Certainly feels like we are missing something (e.g. OPs age or has some kind of conviction?)
 
If it was down to an individual high risk factor then it would surely mean that both were stupid money. I wonder if OP if just looking at his current insurer rather than using comparison sites or brokers
 
iaind said:
If it was down to an individual high risk factor then it would surely mean that both were stupid money
Click to expand...

I thought that, but then the £8k quote is the sort of arbitrarily high figure insurers quote e.g. to discourage "normal" young drivers (i.e. only "rich" people would generally still pay that) from driving more powerful cars - although again seems an odd cut off between a 105bhp 1.6 diesel and either a 125bhp 1.4 petrol / 140bhp 2.0 diesel.
 
Nasher said:
I'd go for a 2005 3.2 V6 :)

The run of the mill ones are a bit boring TBH.
Click to expand...

Although other than the noise the V6 isn't a much better shout than a 2.0TFSI :)

Not that it matters, as yet we still don't know why the OP has difficulty insuring even a 1.4TFSI :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom