Retired Fed here so my situation is very specific.
I've done a bunch of spreadsheets with various assumptions on insurance cost increase and medical scenarios as I home in on age 65. What I am finding is that if you have a good employer plan in retirement, as I do from the U.S. federal govt, the financial outcome of foregoing Part B, taking the premium you would have paid for Part B and investing instead, seems to be a no-brainer in terms of $ you save/gain.
The monkey wrench is that the benefit shrinks dramatically if you delay taking Part B, due to the 10% annual penalty, so best to decide yea or nay immediately at initial enrollment.
So why do 70% of federal retirees maintain their federal insurance AND enroll in Part B? 1. Government employees tend to be a risk-averse lot (they're not out there running around being entrepreneurs, for example), so they be like "Even MORE insurance I can buy, yay!" 2. You've got the administrative ease of not having to deal with paperwork -- never or hardly ever having to file a claim or pay a bill. 3. As a corollary to 2., if you get a little flaky in your golden years, your kids don't have to help deal with medical paperwork for you.
The only compelling reason for me is that Medicare expands your provider network. If you get some weird disease and want to see the best specialist 3 states away, you're going to save as most physicians remain in the Medicare network. (I looked up stats on that also.)
If I do take Part B, it makes sense to shift to a lower level, less expensive federal employee plan than the Cadillac plan I currently carry. I can experiment with various fed plans at open season every year. Keeping a high level plan and enrolling in Part B seems to really be a double premium hit and waste of $.
Good point above, if you're still employed with insurance, or your spouse is and can add you (which is what we did when my SO retired before I did), there's no penalty, so fine to delay and invest the premium you would otherwise pay.