If you’re only saving a couple hundred bucks a year but your car isn’t worth much, sometimes it’s just not worth stressing over.
That’s pretty much how I see it too. I used to get nervous about dropping coverage, but when I did the math on my old Corolla, the numbers just didn’t add up. One thing I’d add—sometimes insurance companies will actually total out a car for cosmetic hail damage, even if it still runs fine. Then you’re stuck with a salvage title, which can be a headache if you ever want to sell. Just something to keep in mind.
Yeah, that whole salvage title thing is what really gets me thinking twice. I’m actually shopping for insurance right now for my first car (it’s a 2011 Civic, nothing fancy), and I’ve been going back and forth on whether to keep comprehensive coverage. The numbers are kind of close—like, I’d only save about $150 a year if I dropped it. But after reading stories like the Kansas hail one, I started digging into how claims work.
Here’s what I found: if your car’s value is already low, even a minor cosmetic issue can push it over the “totaled” threshold. That means you could end up with a car that runs fine but has a salvage title, which apparently tanks resale value and can make getting future insurance a pain. Honestly, that seems like more hassle than the savings are worth... at least for me.
I guess it comes down to risk tolerance. If you’re okay with the possibility of driving a dinged-up car or dealing with paperwork headaches later, dropping coverage might make sense. But after seeing how quickly things can go sideways (hail isn’t even rare where I live), I’m leaning toward keeping it for now.
Honestly, I get where you’re coming from, but I’m kinda on the fence about keeping comprehensive for an older Civic. My last car was worth about as much as a fancy toaster, and when I did the math, the premiums plus the deductible would’ve almost equaled what I could sell it for anyway. If hail hits, yeah, it’s a pain, but I’d probably just rock the dents and call it “character.” Guess it depends how much you care about resale or if you’re cool driving a car that looks like it survived a golf ball apocalypse.
Totally get where you’re coming from—when I drove an old Accord, I dropped comprehensive for the same reason. The math just didn’t make sense, and honestly, a few dings didn’t bother me. Now that I drive something a bit pricier, though, my perspective’s changed. One hailstorm and it could be thousands in repairs, so I keep full coverage even though it stings every renewal.
But yeah, on an older Civic? If you’re not worried about resale or cosmetic stuff, it might not be worth it. The premiums can add up fast and if the car’s only worth a couple grand, you’re basically just covering the peace of mind. For some people that’s huge, for others it’s like...meh, dents give it personality.
I do wonder sometimes if insurance companies count on people over-insuring older cars out of habit. It’s easy to just renew without really thinking about what you’re getting for your money.
Insurance companies definitely bank on people not paying attention. I only keep comprehensive on my classics because the value’s there, but for an old beater? Not worth it. Most folks are just tossing money away year after year.
