I get where you’re coming from. I tried Metromile for a bit, and it felt like every little thing got flagged—like, even just slowing down for a yellow light. Has anyone actually seen their rates go down with these programs, or is it mostly just marketing?
Mileage-based car insurance: who’s using it and which company do you like?
That’s been my experience, too. I tried one of those “pay as you drive” things for a few months—can’t remember which company, but it wasn’t Metromile—and it dinged me for the weirdest stuff. I drive a ‘72 Chevelle on weekends, so I barely rack up miles, but my rates didn’t budge. Felt like all the promises about savings were just smoke and mirrors, at least for folks like me that don’t daily drive. Maybe it works better for city commuters? Hard to say.
I get where you’re coming from, but I’m not sure it’s totally smoke and mirrors for everyone. You mentioned:
Felt like all the promises about savings were just smoke and mirrors, at least for folks like me that don’t daily drive.
I’m actually looking into insurance for the first time (finally getting my own car), and I’ve been digging into these pay-per-mile options. Here’s what I’ve pieced together so far:
1. Not every company calculates “mileage-based” the same way. Some use a plug-in device, others want you to snap odometer pics, and a few track more than just miles—like time of day or “hard braking.” That last bit can be a dealbreaker if you’re not into being monitored.
2. The base rate matters way more than they advertise. Even if you barely drive, if your base rate is high, the per-mile savings don’t really add up. I found that out doing some online quotes—sometimes the “discount” is just a few bucks a month.
3. Some companies seem to cater more to urban drivers who rack up short trips (like city commuters), but for people like you or me—weekend drivers, classic cars, etc.—the system doesn’t always fit. I read on another forum that Metromile gave someone a fair shake for low mileage, but Root dinged them for “driving style,” which felt weirdly subjective.
4. If you’re driving a classic (like your Chevelle), some of these companies might not even cover older vehicles, or they’ll just default to their regular rates anyway.
I’m still skeptical, but I’m not ruling it out yet. I guess my takeaway is: if you’re thinking about it, get a few quotes and read the fine print on what they actually track. Sometimes it’s less about the miles and more about how/when/where you drive... which isn’t always clear up front.
If anyone’s had luck with a pay-per-mile plan as a low-mileage driver (especially with an older car), I’d love to hear about it. Otherwise, I’m leaning toward just sticking with traditional insurance for now and seeing what happens down the line.
Yeah, the “hard braking” thing cracks me up—like, sorry I didn’t want to rear-end the guy who cut me off. I’ve got three kids in the back and snacks flying everywhere, so I’d probably rack up “unsafe driver” points just from school drop-off alone. Has anyone actually seen their rates go *down* with these trackers, or is it mostly just a fancy way to guilt us into driving like we’re taking a driver’s test?
Mileage-based insurance sounded great to me at first, but the reality’s a bit more complicated. I totally get what you mean about the “hard braking” thing—sometimes you just have to react, and it’s not like you’re out there drag racing. I tried one of those trackers with Allstate for a while, and honestly, I drove like I was being graded by my high school driver’s ed teacher. It got old fast.
My rates did go down a little, but not enough to make up for the constant paranoia. Plus, it dinged me for stuff that felt out of my control—like slamming on the brakes because a squirrel darted out or someone cut me off. Maybe if you’re driving mostly empty roads it works, but in real life? Not so much. I’m all for paying less if you drive less, but the way they track “safe” driving feels kind of disconnected from reality sometimes.