It stands to reason that the premium is a combination of factors that add to
up the level of exposure the insuror feels they have. Complex airplane and
low-time pilot? Bigger risk. Simple airplane, high hull value? Bigger
risk though in different amounts.
So, yes the SR-22 would be 4x the Tigers hull value. And it's more complex
though not like stepping up to a P210 for example. And frankly the accident
record, for whatever reasons, hasn't been stellar particularly given the
size of the fleet. So higher premiums.

Talking with Cirrus, I didn't qualify for the insurance reduction program as
I already have an IR.

"David Megginson" wrote in message
...
"Mark T. Mueller" writes:

I may be all wrong, but I thought the bulk of insurance premiums was
tied up in the liability, not hull.

I think that's wrong. I pay 2.7% of insured value for in-motion and
not-in-motion hull insurance. More experienced pilots probably pay
less, but I'd be surprised (happy, but surprised) to see it get much
under 2%. What do people pay down in the U.S. for
in-motion/not-in-motion?

Are you buying $1M smooth coverage?

I have CAD 1M (USD 715K) total combined liability -- no per-seat
maximum -- at CAD 515/year (USD 370/year). That's a small fraction of
what I pay for hull coverage, even for a plane that's worth only USD
50K. I was an 85-hour, newly-minted, unrated PPL at the time, so
that's about as expensive as liability would get.


All the best,


David