Cruiser insurance NOT cheaper than Sports Bike?

N

noobwagon

Member
Hello world,

I'm finishing my Motorcycle Training Course this Sunday and I'm going to get a bike at the start of next week. I'm looking at all 3 options: cruisers, sports bikes and dual sports. Specifically: 2005 Suzuki GZ250 vs. 2016 Yamaha R3 vs 2015 Yamaha xt250.

I really like how comfortable cruisers are (especially for long trips) and almost everyone on here says they are significantly cheaper to insure so it seemed like the logical choice to me (the bike was about $3000 less too and I don't care for speed)! However, the agent at Dalton Timmis is telling me the gz250 is only $26 less per year than a r3! (I'm looking at about $160/month). I find this very hard to believe, how can a 10 year old 250cc cruiser which tops out at 125 km/h and isn't capable of any sort of stunting whatsoever be the same to insure as a 320cc sports bike for a 21 year old new rider!?!? I called up Desjardins and the quote they gave me for the gz250 was half of what they quoted me for the r3 (which is what I expected)! Do you think I should get another quote from another agent or was my preconceived notion about cruisers being cheaper a myth (altough Desjardins agreed with me on that theory)?

Anybody here got quotes on a cruiser and a sports bike at the same time? Was the cruiser cheaper? (Assuming they are similar in power and displacement)?

Also anybody around my age (21) who just got their m2 let me know what you're paying for insurance and what you're riding, I'm curious.

Thanks!
 
Some companies just go by cc's.
Keep calling around and find the cheapest rate.
And maybe try a different DT agent. Try Andy Singh.

Sent from my custom purple Joe Bass mobile device using Tapatalk
 
For a shadow phantom 750 Aviva wont even consider to insure me with an m2, but they will insure me on a 600 supersport lol, I'm 20. Keep shopping around, some companies take into account the type of bike, some strictly look at cc's
 
Wow a phantom 750 would be so sweet. What are you paying for the 600 supersport? Close to 7 grand I'm assuming? I'm definitely gunna keep shopping till I get something affordable though.
 
Alright i'll give Mr.Singh a call tomorrow morning, thanks for the advice.

Even if the companies went strictly of cc (which seems ridiculous) the 250cc should have been cheaper than the 320cc right?

The agent said that the quote he gave me was "the cheapest of 18 insurance companies he checked" though but when I called Desjardin they gave me a cheaper rate for the 250 than him, so maybe he didn't check Desjardin? I'm sure a broker could bring the rate they gave me even lower hope Mr.Singh can hook me up.
 
Don't forget that smaller and beginner bikes are also categories that the insurance companies go by.

The number of crashes and payouts are a major factor.

I would kind of expect the Dually to be the most costly of that trio for insurance.

When I started with an '82 KZ250LTD ten or fifteen years ago, my insurance was $223 per year,
but I'd been driving cars for 30 years, with no at fault claims.
 
I paid $1600 + tax to insure my Shadow 500. I'm 30 though, but from some quotes before buying Dalton Timmis seemed to have around the same price for anything between 250-499cc. Keep looking, get some more quotes. Mitchell & Whale also gave me some decent prices.
 
Ouch man that's like throwing away the cost of the bike every year just to insure it! Yeah the r3 seems like the best option for us, 2grand a year isn't bad.
 
Yeah the dual sport was only a little bit more surprisingly, but yeah you're right beginner bikes defiantly get more claims I didn't think about that.

Wow $223 a year haha, that's unreal wish I had a time machine.
 
I don't find cruisers at all comfortable for long trips. The low seat and overall ergos limit my visibility and put too much pressure on lower back. Also handling is generally very poor if you ever intend to enjoy twisties.

What's built for long distance is sport touring bikes like a V-Strom for example. There are many other options though. Certain dual sports may work too but most of them can't handle highway speeds well aside from the big boys (650cc like KLR or DR).
 
noobwagon said:
Ouch man that's like throwing away the cost of the bike every year just to insure it! Yeah the r3 seems like the best option for us, 2grand a year isn't bad.
Click to expand...

The cost of the bike at the low end is barely relevant. You're not insuring the bike so much as you are insuring yourself for medical benefits and after-crash care.

Also, with you being a new rider, the type of starter bike you're on and the differences between them at the low cc end of the scale are far less relevant than your lack of riding experience. The odds of you going down are very good no matter what kind of bike you're on, and the big insurance cost will be your personal accident benefits, wage replacement, rehab etc, not fixing or replacing the bike.
 
Last edited:
noobwagon said:
I really like how comfortable cruisers are (especially for long trips) ...
Click to expand...

You are probably judging this by sitting on it in the showroom ... this gives no indication of the effect that the wind will have when you are rolling down the road, nor will it give much indication of how well the suspension works or how well sorted the steering is. A lot of cruisers have compromised steering geometry and suspension travel, and too-far-forward footpeg positions that are not well suited for using your weight on the footpegs.

The old fashioned "standard" bike was built that way for a reason. The modern "standard" is sometimes disguised as a naked bike, sometimes disguised as a dual-sport, sometimes disguised as an adventure bike, and on occasion disguised as a sport bike. The small-displacement sport bike class (300cc and below) have rather upright and standard-ish riding positions ... the handlebars are above the top clamp.

I can ride my cbr125 all day and still be able to walk.
 
All of the smaller bikes tend to be more standardish than their larger brothers and sisters.
Don't forget that the Goldwing started out as a standard bike.
It seems that the market or suppliers wants more differentiation at the higher end bikes.
I've never heard of a VStrom called a Sport touring before.
I tend to thing of the Concours, ST1300 et al as sport touring.

Anyways, the $223 insurance didn't last long. I moved up to an 1100 cc cruiser too soon, and tripled or quadrupled it before I should have.

The thing about the smaller bikes, is that they will ride at highway speeds,
but it is very difficult for a beginner to get them to do it for a sustained period of time.

It takes seat time to learn the ins and outs of the bike, and where the sweet spots are.

Most people don't take that time, and jump to a larger bike that can stay in second gear,
and still do what the smaller bike does, so they never learn about gearing until much later.

There is an app or a site that shows the basic sitting position of different bikes, based on your height.

Also, cruiser type bikes tend to turn better at very low speeds, than sport or supersport bikes.
Whereas, other types have more clearance for higher speed turns.
I find that my knees ache on an ss bike, as they are so bent up. With a cruiser you can stretch your legs more, and even get highway pegs. I don't find difficulty with the lower back, my problems tend to be upper back, which is fine on my VStrom.

So, it depends on what speeds and what purpose you want the bike for.
 
Last edited:
noobwagon said:
...how can a 10 year old 250cc cruiser which tops out at 125 km/h and isn't capable of any sort of stunting whatsoever be the same to insure as a 320cc sports bike...
Click to expand...

Baggsy said:
All of the smaller bikes tend to be more standardish than their larger brothers and sisters...
Click to expand...

An R3 might look sporty and you might call it a sport bike due to its looks, but it has little in common with a super sport, or SS bikes. The SS bikes are expensive to insure. As Baggsy has said, all the small learner bikes have similar specs with minor differences, as their engines are all about the same. And as stated, most of your premium goes to fixing YOU up in a crash, not the bike. No matter than you ride an R3 or a GZ250 when you hit the curb the damage to you will be the same. <500cc <50hp would be ok.

The gz250 doing 90+kph in a 40kph zone is stunting. Ride the gz on the 401 in the emergency lane in rush hour and see what happens. Any bike ridden recklessly can get you a stunting charge. With a small engine you just have to work harder at it. It can be done.

Choose whatever small bike you like. Call every insurance company and get a quote. Insurance companies all rate bikes differently. Get the best rate you can.
 
My wife, a freshly minted M2 (Albeit older) is paying under $500/year on a GZ250.

Your age is working against you, but the previous owner of my wifes GZ was in your age range and said he was only paying around $1000/year (in Toronto, at that), so I'd suggest you need to call around more...as others have touched on not all insurance companies rate bikes the same way.

x3 calling Andy Singh at Dalton Timmis - good agent, and Dalton is known for having very attractive cruiser rates.

Make sure you are getting quotes for liability only as well, since you are buying an older bike - if your bike is only worth $1500-$2000 and you have a $1000 deductible anyways there's a tipping point where the money saved for not having it make more sense from a cost savings standpoint.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I've never actually ridden a cruiser for a long period of time, maybe I should though before I buy the bike, don't want to regret it. In terms of a sports touring like a v-storm I can't afford those kinds of bikes let alone insurance. My budget is about 6 grand, and ideally under 150/month for insurance (hopefully less if I get a cruiser). Even dual sports with my budget I would be limited to a 250, which like you said would be sketchy on the highways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom