[sploo]

Originally Posted by Z_Victor1

Interesting...I'm with LV= and asked them what the increase would be for MPPK. And was quoted a derisory figure of about £6.50 with 5 months remaining on policy.

We agreed it was an engine management upgrade with a 25kW increase in power.......

Oh dear... I tried to get a quote from the LV= website, and it refused. I unticked all the mods to see what the base price would have been... and it still refused. I'm an old f*rt with full no claims, no accidents, medium mileage, and living in a low risk area. Barking.

I did try to call them yesterday but gave up after listening to the piped elevator music after 10 mins

[sploo]

Well, so far... not so good. After being told by BMW Insurance (on two separate calls) that...

a) The PPK would make no difference to a quote
b) They wouldn't insure a car with the PPK at all

...I managed to get in touch with a guy at Allianz (who provide BMW Insurance) and detailed the kit to him. He was very good, and they will insure it, and the quote is OK (20-30% higher than the best price I can get for the unmodified car).

However, he did tell me that Allianz themselves (not through BMW Insurance) would be more conservative, and all other standard insurers are similarly scared off by the intercooler. Apparently it can be an indicator of someone fitting a bigger turbo and keeping quiet about it.

Specialists (e.g. Adrian Flux) will cover it, but the premium is nearly twice that of the unmodified car.

So, I'd go ahead and go with BMW Insurance, but I tend to keep cars for many years, and I'm worried I'm going to back myself into a corner with regards to insurance (i.e. limited choice, and possible resulting high cost).

I could just tell an insurer "it's a chipping + brakes", but they are specialists in finding ways not to pay in the event of a claim, so I don't want to take that risk.

I'm taking another look into the Steinbauer box as suggested earlier in the thread, but ironically my current insurer (Allianz) won't insure the car with just that either

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by sploo

Well, so far... not so good. After being told by BMW Insurance (on two separate calls) that...

a) The PPK would make no difference to a quote
b) They wouldn't insure a car with the PPK at all

...I managed to get in touch with a guy at Allianz (who provide BMW Insurance) and detailed the kit to him. He was very good, and they will insure it, and the quote is OK (20-30% higher than the best price I can get for the unmodified car).

However, he did tell me that Allianz themselves (not through BMW Insurance) would be more conservative, and all other standard insurers are similarly scared off by the intercooler. Apparently it can be an indicator of someone fitting a bigger turbo and keeping quiet about it.

Specialists (e.g. Adrian Flux) will cover it, but the premium is nearly twice that of the unmodified car.

So, I'd go ahead and go with BMW Insurance, but I tend to keep cars for many years, and I'm worried I'm going to back myself into a corner with regards to insurance (i.e. limited choice, and possible resulting high cost).

I could just tell an insurer "it's a chipping + brakes", but they are specialists in finding ways not to pay in the event of a claim, so I don't want to take that risk.

I'm taking another look into the Steinbauer box as suggested earlier in the thread, but ironically my current insurer (Allianz) won't insure the car with just that either

Have you tried A-plan Thatcham? It has to be Thatcham as they are the only ones that specialise in modified cars.

I was with BMW insurance, then they made a U turn on my suspension mods and tried to stiff me with a massive 'unexplainable' renewal quote. They didn't charge for the PPK. But I know what you mean, they are not consistent.

[Watsey]

I have two cars, my F31 330D and my wife's Qashqai, insured with Admiral MultiCar. Obviously premiums vary wildly with age, postcode, accident history, etc, but I was quoted : 1. an additional ~£20 per year if I had the PPK upgrade including brakes (it came in the lower power increase % band); 2. an a further additional ~£20 per year if I move to ACS springs and Birds' ARBs.

All on the basis of full disclosure (i.e. intercooler being changed), and all work being done professionally. If I opt for an ACS/Steinbauer box or a remap which moves the % output into the 'up to 25%' band, the annual increase for 1. would be ~£80.

Admiral have been very helpful. The only caveat, and it could be argued that it's a big one, is that the modifications themselves would not be insured. In the event of a total loss I could be out of pocket to the tune of say £5K.

I'll be getting other quotes, mainly to see whether the caveats regarding uninsured modifications is a common position.

[SkyJawa]

The PPK IC is only the same as a standard 335 one anyway IIRC. There really should be little issue.

[Lorcan]

Originally Posted by sploo

I'm an old f*rt with full no claims, no accidents, medium mileage, and living in a low risk area. Barking.

Barking is a low risk area?

Did you try Dave Goodman @ Performance Direct yet?

[SkyJawa]

Originally Posted by Watsey

The only caveat, and it could be argued that it's a big one, is that the modifications themselves would not be insured. In the event of a total loss I could be out of pocket to the tune of say £5K.

That's pretty standard with most insurers....

[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by SkyJawa

That's pretty standard with most insurers....

I think that's how it links in with your GAP insurance.

When I was sorting my GAP out, they went over the modifications side of things.

Example used was say base cost 30k and then someone adds in 15k of mods.

The GAP would not cover that cost.

It's replacement car not replacement modified car.

So even if your total cost car insurance value increases your GAP stays as is.

This was last summer, however that is how I believe it worked..

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by Watsey

The only caveat, and it could be argued that it's a big one, is that the modifications themselves would not be insured. In the event of a total loss I could be out of pocket to the tune of say £5K.

I'll be getting other quotes, mainly to see whether the caveats regarding uninsured modifications is a common position.

I'm quite glad the insurance companies are doing that.

Coming from some serious car tuning forums, the owners are delusional, and I'm sure is the reason why insurance companies don't want to touch modified cars.

In the modified car scene you get some dude spending £15k to completely rebuild his engine, then also puts £12k worth of alloys on it. And expects his car to be worth +£27K in the event of an insurance pay out. Bonkers.....especially as the engine rebuild was probably 50% labour, which adds nothing, then the parts themselves devalue just like anything else.

[sploo]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Have you tried A-plan Thatcham? It has to be Thatcham as they are the only ones that specialise in modified cars.

I was with BMW insurance, then they made a U turn on my suspension mods and tried to stiff me with a massive 'unexplainable' renewal quote. They didn't charge for the PPK. But I know what you mean, they are not consistent.

Yea, A-plan were in the ~2x my current premium range.

The only thing consistent about insurers is their inconsistency...

Originally Posted by Watsey

I have two cars, my F31 330D and my wife's Qashqai, insured with Admiral MultiCar. Obviously premiums vary wildly with age, postcode, accident history, etc, but I was quoted : 1. an additional ~£20 per year if I had the PPK upgrade including brakes (it came in the lower power increase % band); 2. an a further additional ~£20 per year if I move to ACS springs and Birds' ARBs.

All on the basis of full disclosure (i.e. intercooler being changed), and all work being done professionally. If I opt for an ACS/Steinbauer box or a remap which moves the % output into the 'up to 25%' band, the annual increase for 1. would be ~£80.

Admiral have been very helpful. The only caveat, and it could be argued that it's a big one, is that the modifications themselves would not be insured. In the event of a total loss I could be out of pocket to the tune of say £5K.

I'll be getting other quotes, mainly to see whether the caveats regarding uninsured modifications is a common position.

As soon as I tick the intercooler mod with Admiral, Allianz etc. I always end up with "computer says no". I don't have a problem with the mods not being covered though - if I stuffed a car badly enough to destroy the ECU I suspect I'd have bigger problems on my hands... like no hands.

The daft thing is that the choice looks like:

* Third party mod giving ~20% bhp increase => no big deal and small premium increase
* BMW supplied, BMW fitted mod, giving just 10%, and including better brakes => either a big increase in premium or insurance refused

Barking. Which takes me nicely to...

Originally Posted by Lorcan

Barking is a low risk area?

Did you try Dave Goodman @ Performance Direct yet?

[Context for others - I spoke to Rossiters (which turned out to be Lorcan) earlier today about the Steinbauer kit]

Closer to Berkshire than Barking

Yea, I phoned Dave and gave him details (many thanks for the reference) - he said he'd get back to me tomorrow. If the quote is decent then it would mean I have two potential insurance sources (BMW Insurance and Performance Direct).

It'd still give me a dilemma though:

* Steinbauer box giving a higher claimed increase & lower up-front cost vs the PPK, but with the downsides of no brake change and (hopefully unlikely) problems with BMW if I had engine trouble
* BMW PPK, with the downsides of potential insurance hassle (and I tend to keep a car for a long time, so it could be recurring hassle)

[sploo]

Just updating/closing this: in the end I went for a Steinbauer box from Lorcan, which was fitted today by Mulgari in Berkshire.

Insurance was about £40 over my usual fully comp + protected NCD premium.

[JOE YOUNG]

Originally Posted by sploo

Well, so far... not so good. After being told by BMW Insurance (on two separate calls) that...

a) The PPK would make no difference to a quote
b) They wouldn't insure a car with the PPK at all

...I managed to get in touch with a guy at Allianz (who provide BMW Insurance) and detailed the kit to him. He was very good, and they will insure it, and the quote is OK (20-30% higher than the best price I can get for the unmodified car).

However, he did tell me that Allianz themselves (not through BMW Insurance) would be more conservative, and all other standard insurers are similarly scared off by the intercooler. Apparently it can be an indicator of someone fitting a bigger turbo and keeping quiet about i

Specialists (e.g. Adrian Flux) will cover it, but the premium is nearly twice that of the unmodified car.

So, I'd go ahead and go with BMW Insurance, but I tend to keep cars for many years, and I'm worried I'm going to back myself into a corner with regards to insurance (i.e. limited choice, and possible resulting high cost).

I could just tell an insurer "it's a chipping + brakes", but they are specialists in finding ways not to pay in the event of a claim, so I don't want to take that risk.

I'm taking another look into the Steinbauer box as suggested earlier in the thread, but ironically my current insurer (Allianz) won't insure the car with just that either

Same here. I called Bmw Insurance about ppk. 1st I was told they wont cover it after phoning Allianz. 2 weeks later, 2nd call and I was told "it is an acceptable mod since it is fitted by a BMW dealer". I had to confirm it though and made sure is it noted in the document, then ordered PPK from Cotswold Bmw at a very reasonable price.

BTW. Premium didnot change.

[GaryUFM]

Originally Posted by DanDM

I hate insurers.
What other industry have such a free hand to just make it up as they go along, wholly un-challengeable by those forced by law to use them. Madness.

Unfortunately, that's the nature of insurance. In any other game, e.g. manufacturing cars, your costs are known up front: materials, labour, overheads, etc. So, how much margin do you want/need to make? There's your RRP*.

For insurers, the biggest cost of 'production' we face, is the cost of claims, which of course is trying to predict the future. For base spec vehicles there is a lot of info to guide the underwriters: Thatcham stats, NCAP ratings, demographic data across the industry based on job/postcode/age/gender (even if by law we are prevented now from using some of this on grounds of discrimination!). The more info an UW has, the more certain they can be, the closer to the technical price for the risk they can get.

Start muddying the water with mods like this (even OEM engine enhancements) and all of a sudden they're out of their comfort zone because data is lacking, and when an UW is uncertain, that's when you see funny premiums come out: if in doubt, stick it up. Last thing an UW wants to do is lose money across an account (e.g. the motor book).

Where you get folks who specialise in such mods (not your high street names on the whole) because of their experience, they should give you sensible terms. Trade off here is though, you are now dealing with a technical UW organisation, that doesn't necessarily place the same emphasis on claims service as they lack that specialty, they don't have a big public brand to protect, and if a Lloyd's syndicate, the capital that underpins the UW capacity is effectively treated as a financial investment by the backers. Therefore they need returns, therefore claims are challenged; quite aggressively in some cases.

Expecting all insurers to be able to deal with everything you can throw at them and be able to do a decent job of it, is like going to Dacia, and asking for them to provide you with something like an M6. Each has its area of expertise, and most household names in insurance are such because they aim squarely at the mainstream.

*As an aside, I've also read elsewhere that insurance companies should make more of an effort to give best price first time. And yet on this very forum there is an expectation that you will negotiate up to 25% discounts on a £40k+ purchase. Why is it different for insurance?

The UWs know what price they want to achieve for a certain risk to provide a certain profit margin (comments above about how accurate they can do that based on unknown cost of future claims notwithstanding). If you challenge that, they weigh up the cost of losing your custom completely with eroding this profit margin. If you have a decent risk profile, and there is scope, they'll reduce it. You get lower premium, they've retained your business...everyone's a winner.

But for some reason, because it is insurance, we're trying to shaft you. Buying a car though, and it's accepted and even a point of pride how well you can reduce on list. Many on here will be running their own business and will understand that there is a price they want to achieve for their product or service, but for the right customer there is room to manoeuvre within that desired margin. Why should insurers be exempt from these very simple economics of running a business?

[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by GaryUFM

Unfortunately, that's the nature of insurance. In any other game, e.g. manufacturing cars, your costs are known up front: materials, labour, overheads, etc. So, how much margin do you want/need to make? There's your RRP*.

For insurers, the biggest cost of 'production' we face, is the cost of claims, which of course is trying to predict the future. For base spec vehicles there is a lot of info to guide the underwriters: Thatcham stats, NCAP ratings, demographic data across the industry based on job/postcode/age/gender (even if by law we are prevented now from using some of this on grounds of discrimination!). The more info an UW has, the more certain they can be, the closer to the technical price for the risk they can get.

Start muddying the water with mods like this (even OEM engine enhancements) and all of a sudden they're out of their comfort zone because data is lacking, and when an UW is uncertain, that's when you see funny premiums come out: if in doubt, stick it up. Last thing an UW wants to do is lose money across an account (e.g. the motor book).

Where you get folks who specialise in such mods (not your high street names on the whole) because of their experience, they should give you sensible terms. Trade off here is though, you are now dealing with a technical UW organisation, that doesn't necessarily place the same emphasis on claims service as they lack that specialty, they don't have a big public brand to protect, and if a Lloyd's syndicate, the capital that underpins the UW capacity is effectively treated as a financial investment by the backers. Therefore they need returns, therefore claims are challenged; quite aggressively in some cases.

Expecting all insurers to be able to deal with everything you can throw at them and be able to do a decent job of it, is like going to Dacia, and asking for them to provide you with something like an M6. Each has its area of expertise, and most household names in insurance are such because they aim squarely at the mainstream.

*As an aside, I've also read elsewhere that insurance companies should make more of an effort to give best price first time. And yet on this very forum there is an expectation that you will negotiate up to 25% discounts on a £40k+ purchase. Why is it different for insurance?

The UWs know what price they want to achieve for a certain risk to provide a certain profit margin (comments above about how accurate they can do that based on hnknown cost of future claims notwithstanding). If you challenge that, they weigh up the cost of losing your custom completely with eroding this profit margin. If you have a decent risk profile, and there is scope, they'll reduce it. You get lower premium, they've retained your business...everyone's a winner.

But for some reason, because it is insurance, we're trying to shaft you. Buying a car though, and it's accepted and even a point of pride how well you can reduce on list. Many on here will be running their own business and will understand that there is a price they want to achieve for their product or service, but for the right customer there is room to manoeuvre within tgstcdesired margin. Why should insurers be exempt from these very simple economics of running a business?

I accept that for a new customer, new car, etc, that initial generation of a quote is a bit of an unknown.
However when you are with a company for say 8 years, you expect possibly mild jumps in premium, in the past I have nearly had my annual amount double.

Also when dealing with a company it soon becomes obvious that a huge number of people on the desk just do not have a clue.

Even supervisors come over as brain dead.

When there is a problem that they are struggling with, guess what the line drops off - funny that.

The industry is slightly better than it was, regulation is slowly bringing the lying stealing bunch inline. The Insurance ombudsman help a lot with that.

With buying a car, majority of people know manufacturers and dealerships have quite large margins and will try to screw then over.

So yeah exactly same with insurance - bunch of people trying to screw you over.

Winter tyres are a prime example where Insurance becomes ridiculous. Some expect you to declare them, others have been made to state there is no need to contact them.
However, non will turn round and actually reduce your premium for fitting them. This even with a huge amount of evidence on the added safety winter tyres bring.
If anything, you run the risk of your premium going up due to change in wheel size and of course admin fees.

The industry is not as transparent as it should be, there is a huge difference on definitions as options within the same company, never mind different ones.

At times not sure who winds me up the most when dealing with them, mobile phone call centres or insurance call centres.

[GaryUFM]

I should have made the distinction between underwriters who actually set the prices (underlying rates) and parameters for flex, and those that for the most part you and I talk to in an operations center, who on paper may be underwriters, but are using what the system tells them, and what little flex is built into it for them.

But I guess, whether a business (any business) is shafting you by initially charging what it would like to get for its products or services but reducing if your idea of value doesn't match theirs is subjective. I see it just as how people do business. A vendor wants to receive a good price and maximise profit. A punter wants to minimise their cost. If there is too great a gap, either - hopefully - somewhere between the two some value can be agreed with both parties compromising to some degree; or you walk away to another provider.

I don't think that's unfair at all, personally.

It is notable though, how many people running their own business think that this is fair as the provider, but not when they're the punter!

[sploo]

Originally Posted by GaryUFM

Unfortunately, that's the nature of insurance. In any other game, e.g. manufacturing cars, your costs are known up front: materials, labour, overheads, etc. So, how much margin do you want/need to make? There's your RRP*.

For insurers, the biggest cost of 'production' we face, is the cost of claims, which of course is trying to predict the future. For base spec vehicles there is a lot of info to guide the underwriters: Thatcham stats, NCAP ratings, demographic data across the industry based on job/postcode/age/gender (even if by law we are prevented now from using some of this on grounds of discrimination!). The more info an UW has, the more certain they can be, the closer to the technical price for the risk they can get.

Start muddying the water with mods like this (even OEM engine enhancements) and all of a sudden they're out of their comfort zone because data is lacking, and when an UW is uncertain, that's when you see funny premiums come out: if in doubt, stick it up. Last thing an UW wants to do is lose money across an account (e.g. the motor book).

Where you get folks who specialise in such mods (not your high street names on the whole) because of their experience, they should give you sensible terms. Trade off here is though, you are now dealing with a technical UW organisation, that doesn't necessarily place the same emphasis on claims service as they lack that specialty, they don't have a big public brand to protect, and if a Lloyd's syndicate, the capital that underpins the UW capacity is effectively treated as a financial investment by the backers. Therefore they need returns, therefore claims are challenged; quite aggressively in some cases.

Expecting all insurers to be able to deal with everything you can throw at them and be able to do a decent job of it, is like going to Dacia, and asking for them to provide you with something like an M6. Each has its area of expertise, and most household names in insurance are such because they aim squarely at the mainstream.

*As an aside, I've also read elsewhere that insurance companies should make more of an effort to give best price first time. And yet on this very forum there is an expectation that you will negotiate up to 25% discounts on a £40k+ purchase. Why is it different for insurance?

The UWs know what price they want to achieve for a certain risk to provide a certain profit margin (comments above about how accurate they can do that based on hnknown cost of future claims notwithstanding). If you challenge that, they weigh up the cost of losing your custom completely with eroding this profit margin. If you have a decent risk profile, and there is scope, they'll reduce it. You get lower premium, they've retained your business...everyone's a winner.

But for some reason, because it is insurance, we're trying to shaft you. Buying a car though, and it's accepted and even a point of pride how well you can reduce on list. Many on here will be running their own business and will understand that there is a price they want to achieve for their product or service, but for the right customer there is room to manoeuvre within tgstcdesired margin. Why should insurers be exempt from these very simple economics of running a business?

Good post - thanks.

Where the problems came with insuring the PPK actually seems to be about the industry gaining knowledge of shady modding practices; namely that the PPK changes the intercooler, and that's a red flag that the punter has probably also messed with the turbo (but he's only declaring the intercooler because it's visible, and so that change is hard to hide).

In a sense then, there's a disconnect between BWM and (at least, UK) insurers; effectively BMW have created a kit that's hard to insure. As an example of the madness - the relatively low claimed percentage power increase of the kosher factory PPK is either impossible to insure (or very expensive)*, but some unknown third party mod with much higher claimed power increase only adds a tiny premium - all because the computer says no when it comes to the intercooler part of the PPK.


* Obviously you could just be vague and say "PPK" and not mention the specific changes, but personally I'd be wary about getting screwed in the event of a claim.

[Steve_M_Sport]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

According to my before and after dyno runs the PPK only gives about 6-7% power increase

I don't understand why anyone would pay £1200 ish for a PPK upgrade for only 6-7% increase in power (17bhp) - can this small increase actually make a noticeable difference to the car's performance or is it a placebo effect ?

Lights touch paper & runs !

[Gixerste]

Originally Posted by sploo

Having read through the very useful thread at http://f30.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=854258 I've been looking into the M Performance kit for my 2013 F31 330d.

It's got standard brakes, so I need the BMW part number 11 12 2 347 695. So far my understanding of the results would be a new ECU, larger intercooler, and the front brakes would be upgraded from single piston floating callipers with 330mm rotors to four piston fixed callipers with 340mm slotted and drilled rotors. Happy with that.

I've spoken to a few local dealers, but so far BMW Hungerford are looking good.

So what's the problem? Well... insurance. My current provider (Allianz) won't touch it. Admiral would cover the brakes and even up to a 25% BHP increase (much more than the PPK gives); but the intercooler takes it to a category they won't cover.

BMW insurance will cover it, and told me the price wouldn't even change with the kit fitted. But, their quote was significantly more than other providers to start with.

Could anyone recommend another provider that might do a reasonable price?

It's strange that Allianz won't touch it as they're the company that provide BMW Insurance and when I was with them (BMW Ins.) there was no increase in premium with the MPPK fitted to my 330d ??

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by Steve_M_Sport

I don't understand why anyone would pay £1200 ish for a PPK upgrade for only 6-7% increase in power (17bhp) - can this small increase actually make a noticeable difference to the car's performance or is it a placebo effect ?

Lights touch paper & runs !

There have been threads commenting on the changes, but in a word yes. I had a 430d courtesy car not long ago and it felt more like a 420d to me. More torque everywhere with the PPK.

[Gixerste]

Originally Posted by Steve_M_Sport

I don't understand why anyone would pay £1200 ish for a PPK upgrade for only 6-7% increase in power (17bhp) - can this small increase actually make a noticeable difference to the car's performance or is it a placebo effect ?

Lights touch paper & runs !

It certainly isn't a placebo effect and I for one would certainly have it done again

[sploo]

Originally Posted by Steve_M_Sport

I don't understand why anyone would pay £1200 ish for a PPK upgrade for only 6-7% increase in power (17bhp) - can this small increase actually make a noticeable difference to the car's performance or is it a placebo effect ?

Lights touch paper & runs !

NISFAN nails it with the "more torque everywhere" point. Remember that the figures quoted will be peak hp/torque increase - that doesn't adequately describe what happens up to that point (you need to see the graphs). Indeed you could have a tune that didn't actually increase the peak figures at all, but if it gave a healthy bump in torque across the rev range you'd certainly feel the difference (and acceleration figures would improve too).

Now that said, when I first got the Steinbauer I didn't feel that much difference at UK road speeds (i.e. you needed to be at pretty high rpm, so lower gears than the auto box would normally choose). It was tweaked by a Steinbauer tech and the difference was then very noticeable from ~45mph (in fact, we were driving down a road with him changing the maps using a laptop via a cable to the engine bay, so it was an easy comparison).

I haven't however driven a car with the PPK, so I couldn't specifically comment on how that feels.

[sploo]

Originally Posted by Gixerste

It's strange that Allianz won't touch it as they're the company that provide BMW Insurance and when I was with them (BMW Ins.) there was no increase in premium with the MPPK fitted to my 330d ??

It was a bit hokey cokey whenever I spoke to them (yes, no, yes, no etc.)

In the end they would cover it (after somehow realising they were the ones that run BMW Insurance ) but I very much got the warning signals that I could easily end up with problems in the future, so it scared me off the PPK.