[REDSC400]

Gents:
The overall implications of this article in AutoWeek are very, very sobering and of great importance to all of us.

Essentially, the jist of the article is:

1) Insurance companies can and will refuse to insure your vehicle if they feel you have modified the vehicle for performance purposes.

2) Insurance companies have the right to refuse payment of claims if the vehicle was modified AND you, the owner, have not reported the modifications to them.

3) Modifications to vehicles who's purpose is to increase performance above and beyond the "stock" vehicle performance profile can put the car into a high risk category.

This is in general not new news at all. However, I suggest to all here, this is not a discussion of "undercarriage lites" or bling bling paint jobs or aero kits... far from it.

This is a discussion of a vehicles "stock" performance profile from an insurance company perspective (which categorizes the vehicle into a risk pool) and then with simple modifications, by the shade tree mechanic, a vehicle's performance profile morphs into something quite different.

ie: The naturally asperated Toyota Supra (insured as such) easily transformed with $5K of aftermarket add ons into a 500HP vehicle. This is the angle that the insurers are wary of..

Just My two centavos...

BTW, I have been thru this before, back in 1966 and 73 which was one of the key factors which lead to the end of the muscle car era.