I have two vehicles that I am going to need to insure in the near future and wonder how insurance companies look at or handle the issue of replacement cost vs. actual market value. I have just recently restored my 65 300 and I have a pretty good idea of what it's market value is. I did 99% of the restoration myself and managed to keep the restoration costs fairly close to the market value. The car might have cost me 3 times the market value if I'd paid to have most of the work done. I assume I would be awarded a settlement equal to the agreed market value and I would be on my own to replace the car if it were to be stolen or burned etc.. What would I do if I couldn't find a replacement that equals my lost car? Would I be naive to think an insurer would pay to restore a similar car to the same level regardless of the cost excedeing the market value? Perhaps a better example, I also have a mahogany runabout that was custom built (by my father) 45 years ago. The actual market value I'm not certain of as there is really only one way to find that out. However, I know it would cost many times the market value to replicate the boat today if anything were to ever happen to it.(even though I have the blueprints) Would replacement cost ever be considered or is market value (appraised value) always the best we could hope for? Hope this is considered 300 related. These questions might be best asked of my agent but I wanted feedback from anyone who has had issues with replacing rare vehicles. Ryan Hill To send a message to this group, send an email to: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Chrysler300-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/