I tend to agree with you on this one. I've always wondered about comprehensive coverage myself, especially since my cars have usually been older family vehicles. On one hand, it feels like throwing money away each month for something that might never happen... but then again, stories like the hailstorm incident in Kansas make me reconsider.
A few years back, a neighbor's older sedan got completely wrecked by a falling tree limb during a storm. He didn't have comprehensive coverage either, and the repair costs were way beyond what the car was worth. It made me realize that even if your car isn't particularly valuable, unexpected events can still leave you stranded or facing hefty bills.
I guess it comes down to weighing the monthly cost against how much risk you're comfortable taking. Personally, I'm still on the fence—it's tough deciding whether peace of mind is worth the extra expense when you're driving something that's not exactly showroom quality anymore.
"Personally, I'm still on the fence—it's tough deciding whether peace of mind is worth the extra expense when you're driving something that's not exactly showroom quality anymore."
I totally get where you're coming from. A couple years ago, I debated dropping comprehensive coverage on my old Civic to save some cash. Literally two months later, a deer jumped out and smashed the front end. Thankfully, I still had coverage, but it was a close call. It's definitely a gamble, but sometimes that monthly payment feels worth it just to avoid the stress...
That's an interesting point about the deer incident—definitely highlights the unpredictability factor. Still, I wonder if there's a tipping point where comprehensive coverage stops making sense financially. Like, at what vehicle age or value does it become smarter to just set aside some cash for repairs instead of paying premiums? I've been crunching numbers on my older Corolla, and it's not as clear-cut as I'd hoped...
I've been wondering the same thing lately, especially since I'm still pretty new to driving and insurance feels like a maze. My parents always said comprehensive was a must-have, but honestly, with my older Civic, I'm starting to question it. Like, if something major did happen—hail, deer, whatever—would the payout even be worth the premiums I've been paying? Maybe it's smarter to just stash that money aside... but then again, knowing my luck, the second I drop coverage something crazy would happen. How do you even decide?
I get where you're coming from, but honestly, I've found comprehensive coverage to be a bit overrated for older cars. Had an '06 Corolla a few years back and did the math—after factoring in the deductible and the actual value of the car, it just wasn’t worth keeping comprehensive. Even if something like hail or a deer happened, the payout would barely cover repairs after the deductible. Instead, I started putting that premium money into a savings account each month. By the time I eventually sold the car, I had enough set aside to handle any minor-to-medium repairs myself.
Of course, everyone's situation is different—depends on your comfort with risk and how easily you can replace your ride if something major happens. But insurance companies aren't in it to lose money; they're betting nothing happens to your car, and usually they're right...
