insurance

in general would insurance b cheaper for a teenage driver on more of a muscle car than a new sports car??

Generally older cars are cheaper to insure than a new car because the insurance company thinks they are worth less. If you have an accident, it is more likely the insurance company will commit less money to fixing it or writing it off than a newer car.

The problem here is that some muscle cars are worth the same or more than a new car. For instance, you could drive a '67 GTO worth $18,000 but the insurance company may insure it as if it's a 6 cyl. Tempest, worth about $1000.
So you would need an appraisal on the muscle car to make sure the insurance will cover it for its true value..................which might make it as expensive to insure as a new car.

in general would insurance b cheaper for a teenage driver on more of a muscle car than a new sports car??

None of the collector car companies will write a teenage driver. In fact, they won't even write someone unless they are "over" 25 years old. So you would not be able to insure a muscle car for its actual value. As far as liability goes, I don't think anyone will recognize a classic muscle car as a risk the way they used to. But they also will not recognize its value if you are only writing a basic policy instead of an agreed value, or stated value policy.

I do know my collector policy clearly stated that no driver under 25 was covered..........

swi66

with hagerty insurance you only have to be 18 http://www.hagerty.com/

Folks, this post is not necessarily about collector car insurance. Collector policies are cheaper but, of course, really limit the useage, such as no daily driving to and from work, no errands, etc.

I have insured muscle cars on regular insurance policies, so I can drive them to and from work. So long as there's a decent appraisal done, there is no problem about insuring it for its real value.