What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Insurance for an RV-10 = $4659??

MSFT-1

MSFT-1

Well Known Member
I am considering buying a flying RV-10.

I just started shopping for insurance and the quotes I am getting are >$4600.

I have 700 hrs TT with a private+instrument ticket. No accidents/incidents.

Hull value is $225K.

This seems pretty high to me. Comments and suggestions are appreciated.

bruce
 
I pay 1,600 to insure 65,000. 11,500 total time.

The rate you were quoted is better than mine based on insured value.
 
$225,000 will buy a nice house in many parts of the country. Think how expensive it'd be to insure your house if it flew at 200MPH! :D

John <=== won't carry hull insurance. I figure, if I can build it, I can fix it.
 
My C172 insured for $45,000 at about $900.
My RV9A insured for $90,000 at about $1900. $1400 is for the hull part.

As for as going without hull insurance, yes I can fix it, but my next of kin may not be able to.
I wish that there were an option to have hull insurance with a higher deductible, let say $5000 at a much better rate. My current is deductible is $100. I wound not bother with the paper work for such a small claim.

Kent
 
MSFT-1 said:
..
Hull value is $225K.
..
Click to expand...
This seems line with that hull value. Just for comparison, what do you think a new 182 for about that amount would cost to insure? You want to reduce the premium, reduce the hull value. If you built it then insure it for what you have in it in actual costs, if you bought it, then.....
 
w1curtis said:
This seems line with that hull value. Just for comparison, what do you think a new 182 for about that amount would cost to insure? You want to reduce the premium, reduce the hull value. If you built it then insure it for what you have in it in actual costs, if you bought it, then.....
Click to expand...

I'll tell ya cuz I own one... 2004 182T hull value 300K, insured at 1,000,000/100,000 with 700TT and instrument - $3500/yr - avemco with all the discounts applied (5% for recurrent training, 5% for annual king DVD course).

Looks like the RV-10 insurance is about in line based upon hull value and number of fleet hours vs. insured risk (what the insurer are interested it).
 
It's been a while, but I recall reading a caution a while back about under-insuring the hull-value of an airplane. The basic idea is that if you ensure a $200K airplane for $100K and make a claim, the insurer can legally "total" your airplane, pay you the stated value ($100K), and take the plane.

I'd check this out before reducing your hull value to save money on premiums.

- Mark
 
w1curtis said:
This seems line with that hull value. Just for comparison, what do you think a new 182 for about that amount would cost to insure? You want to reduce the premium, reduce the hull value. If you built it then insure it for what you have in it in actual costs, if you bought it, then.....
Click to expand...

You may not come out ahead by under insuring the hull. If the damage comes to within 75% of insured value, the company has the option of totaling the wreck, paying the claim and keeping the airplane which they will sell for whatever they can get, reducing their total pay out. It is all a matter of money from the insurance companies perspective, not the aircraft owner.

I prevented this from happening by reducing the claim to less than 75% by offering to do the repair work myself at a less than the cost in a repair shop. It was the only way to keep the airplane other than getting into the bidding game for the wreck.

Beyond that, the insurance premium for the RV10 is not unrealistic. The airplane is a 4 seat experimental with quite a liability risk. Four seat experimentals do not have a good record with the insurance industry, although the RV10 is not in the same loss league as some others, yet.
 
MSFT-1 said:
I am considering buying a flying RV-10.

I just started shopping for insurance and the quotes I am getting are >$4600.

I have 700 hrs TT with a private+instrument ticket. No accidents/incidents.

Hull value is $225K.

This seems pretty high to me. Comments and suggestions are appreciated.

bruce
Click to expand...
I just got my quote for my -10 with the Vesta engine and it was $4510. That's with $200,000 hull coverage and 200 hrs TT. I have to get five hours of training with Mike or Alex.
 
David-aviator said:
You may not come out ahead by under insuring the hull. If the damage comes to within 75% of insured value, the company has the option of totaling the wreck, paying the claim and keeping the airplane which they will sell for whatever they can get, reducing their total pay out. It is all a matter of money from the insurance companies perspective, not the aircraft owner.

I prevented this from happening by reducing the claim to less than 75% by offering to do the repair work myself at a less than the cost in a repair shop. It was the only way to keep the airplane other than getting into the bidding game for the wreck.
Click to expand...
The point is not that he should under-insure, the point is that if he has a problem with the high premium, reducing the hull value will help. I think you come out WAAAAY ahead if you under-insure to get a reasonable (to each owner) premium, than if you do not insure (hull) because you cannot get a reasonable premium.

You can spend the money on premiums now or spend it on the the difference between what you get from the insurance company after an event later. As in Vegas, you pays your money and take your chances.

David-aviator said:
Beyond that, the insurance premium for the RV10 is not unrealistic. The airplane is a 4 seat experimental with quite a liability risk. Four seat experimentals do not have a good record with the insurance industry, although the RV10 is not in the same loss league as some others, yet.
Click to expand...
That is a pretty pessimistic view. Do you anticipate that the RV-10 will eventually be in the same loss league as some others?
 
markjenn said:
The basic idea is that if you ensure a $200K airplane for $100K and make a claim, the insurer can legally "total" your airplane, pay you the stated value ($100K), and take the plane.



- Mark
Click to expand...

Sorta true, if you have a stated value policy and it totals you get the stated value, you have first salvage rights. You can normally opt to keep your damaged aircraft if you agree to pay what a salvor has offered. As with all insurance read your policy and watch out for the " shalls" and "wills".

Most adjusters could care less who gets the salvage as long as they get rid of it quick and for an amount they feel fit, usually based on a salvage offer. Be prepared to put up the cash to keep it, one thing you have working for you is the salvor wants to pay as little as possible, but if he sees that low time engine and intact glass panel, leather interior etc. he may opt to offer a substantial amount much more than you would have paid in premiums for a realistic stated value. If your in this situation move fast, make an offer and watch out for storage fees which add up quick if you don't have possession of the aircraft.
 
Ted RV8 said:
Todd,

Who was your quote from? That sounds very reasonable for your RV 10
Click to expand...

It's from NationAir, 636-532-0023. I have had the plane insured through them during the entire build process.
 
w1curtis said:
The point is not that he should under-insure, the point is that if he has a problem with the high premium, reducing the hull value will help. I think you come out WAAAAY ahead if you under-insure to get a reasonable (to each owner) premium, than if you do not insure (hull) because you cannot get a reasonable premium.

You can spend the money on premiums now or spend it on the the difference between what you get from the insurance company after an event later. As in Vegas, you pays your money and take your chances.

That is a pretty pessimistic view. Do you anticipate that the RV-10 will eventually be in the same loss league as some others?
Click to expand...
Well yes. Not Lancairs 4p's and the like. But I'd anticipate accident rates similer to the Cirrus line, which insure for around 4K for the first year on a little more Hull.
 
osxuser said:
Well yes. Not Lancairs 4p's and the like. But I'd anticipate accident rates similer to the Cirrus line, which insure for around 4K for the first year on a little more Hull.
Click to expand...

I think the RV-10 will prove to be a very stable and safe platform and will blow the Cirrus away in the accident rates. The person who is going to fly the RV-10 is probably more serious about their flying the typical Cirrus pilot. I believe the Cirrus parachute gives people a false sense of security. I think it is a very safe plane, probably safer than the -10 but it's the type of pilot that will make the difference.
 
osxuser said:
Well yes. Not Lancairs 4p's and the like. But I'd anticipate accident rates similer to the Cirrus line, which insure for around 4K for the first year on a little more Hull.
Click to expand...
How so? I don't see anything in common between a Cirrus pilot and an RV-10 pilot. Cirrus insurance is MUCH more than 4K for the first year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top