Hey folks,
I’ve been debating whether it still makes sense to keep full coverage on my older car. It’s a 10-year-old sedan, and while it still runs great, the market value isn’t very high anymore. In Kentucky, full coverage can really add up, and I’m wondering if it’s actually worth the extra cost when the car’s value has depreciated so much.
I checked a few car insurance quotes Louisville and noticed that liability-only coverage is significantly cheaper. The thing is, if the car gets totaled, the payout might not even be worth the premiums I’m paying every year for comprehensive and collision. Some people say once your car’s worth less than 10x the annual premium, it’s time to drop full coverage.
On the other hand, full coverage still gives peace of mind for things like theft, vandalism, or storm damage—especially with Kentucky weather being so unpredictable. It really comes down to how much risk you’re willing to take.
Has anyone here made the switch from full coverage to liability-only on an older car? Did you regret it or feel like it was the right move?
If you’re unsure, it’s a good idea to compare different policies and see how much you could save by adjusting your coverage. Sometimes just shopping around for affordable Louisville auto policies can make a big difference.
Forum / Discussions à propos du jeu / Is Full Coverage Really Worth It for Older Cars in Kentucky?
Page [1]
26 Juil 2025 à 10h34 | #2
Rather than judge this shift, we might ask what it reveals about our collective hunger for connection, care, and emotional safety. Sex dolls USA aren't taking love away from people.
Page [1]