Montana’s basically a wildlife obstacle course, and rental cars seem to have a target on them.
Can confirm—drove through at dusk last summer and counted three near-misses with deer in under an hour. I used to skip the extra insurance too, but after seeing a friend get stuck with a $900 bill for a cracked headlight (thanks, antelope), I’m way more cautious now. Credit card coverage is great, but like you said, those exclusions can be wild—some don’t cover “acts of nature” or off-pavement driving, which is half the fun in Montana anyway.
Credit card coverage is great, but like you said, those exclusions can be wild—some don’t cover “acts of nature” or off-pavement driving, which is half the fun in Montana anyway.
Yeah, those exclusions are sneaky. I always thought my credit card had me covered until I read the fine print and realized “wildlife collisions” weren’t included. If you’re planning any gravel roads or late-night drives, I’d at least double-check what’s actually protected... Learned that one the hard way after a close call with a surprisingly sturdy raccoon.
I swear, Montana must be where rental car insurance fine print goes to get creative. I once rented a Jeep for a fishing trip out near Big Timber, figured I was all set with my card’s coverage. Turns out, “unpaved surfaces” meant the dirt road to the cabin wasn’t covered... and neither was the time I had to swerve for a herd of deer at dusk. Didn’t hit one, but my heart rate was in the red for a week.
It’s wild how many ways they can wiggle out of paying. Has anyone actually filed a claim and had it go smoothly? Or is it always some loophole like “sorry, you were within 50 feet of a cow, that’s not covered”? I’m starting to think the extra insurance is just paying for peace of mind, especially if you’re not sticking to city streets.
It’s wild how many ways they can wiggle out of paying. Has anyone actually filed a claim and had it go smoothly? Or is it always some loophole like “sorry, you were within 50 feet of a cow, that’s not covered”?
I’ve wondered the same thing. Every time I rent in Montana (or anywhere with rough roads), I read the fine print and still end up feeling like I’m missing something. The “unpaved surfaces” exclusion gets me too—like, what counts as unpaved? Gravel? Dirt? Some of those roads are the only way to get anywhere outside town.
I did have to file a claim once after a rock cracked the windshield on a back road near Red Lodge. My credit card coverage flat-out denied it because the road wasn’t “maintained by a government entity.” Whatever that means. In the end, I paid out of pocket.
I’m starting to think the extra insurance is worth it if you’re headed off the main highways. It’s not cheap, but neither is a surprise repair bill. Anyone else notice how the rental agents get cagey when you ask about what’s really covered? Makes me wonder if anyone ever gets a straight answer.
I get what you’re saying about the exclusions, but I’ve actually had the opposite experience—at least once. Last summer, we rented a minivan in Bozeman for a family trip, and someone sideswiped it in a grocery store parking lot. I used my regular auto insurance (not the credit card or the rental’s coverage), and they handled it without any drama. No weird questions about what kind of surface the car was on or anything like that.
The “unpaved surfaces” exclusion gets me too—like, what counts as unpaved? Gravel? Dirt?
That part drives me nuts, too. But honestly, I feel like if you stick to the main roads and don’t go too far off the beaten path, your own insurance (or even just the credit card) might be enough. The extra insurance is pricey, and sometimes it feels like you’re paying for peace of mind more than actual coverage.
I do agree, though, the rental desk folks never give a straight answer. It’s almost like they want you to feel nervous just so you’ll pay more. I guess it really depends on how much risk you’re willing to take. For me, unless I know I’m heading way out into the sticks, I usually skip the extra.