Consumer Reports Safety Alert - (Withdrawn)

[CPSDarren]

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/babies-kids/child-car-booster-seats/car-seats-2-07/overview/0207_seats_ov.htm

Safety alert: What if this were your child?
Most infant car seats fail our new front- and side-crash tests


A SIDE CRASH, UP CLOSE The Evenflo Discovery infant seat performed poorly in our new side-impact test, shown here. It also failed to meet the federal frontal-crash standard.
You’d think that in a car crash, infants in their cozy car seats would be the most protected passengers of all. But you’d be wrong, our tests reveal.
Consumer Reports Video
SAFETY ALERT
Infant Car Seats





Cars and car seats can’t be sold unless they can withstand a 30-mph frontal crash. But most cars are also tested in a 35-mph frontal crash and in a 38-mph side crash. Car seats aren’t.


When we crash-tested infant car seats at the higher speeds vehicles routinely withstand, most failed disastrously. The car seats twisted violently or flew off their bases, in one case hurling a test dummy 30 feet across the lab. Here are the details:
Of 12 infant seats we tested, only 2 performed well: the Baby Trend Flex-Loc and the Graco SnugRide with EPS.
Nine infant seats provided poor protection in some or all of our tests, even though they meet the federal safety standard. One seat, the Evenflo Discovery, didn’t even meet that standard. We urge federal officials to order a recall of that seat.
Infant car seats sold in Europe undergo more rigorous testing than do models sold in the U.S. Indeed, when we crash-tested an infant seat we bought in England, it was the best in our tests. An infant seat sold in the U.S. by the same manufacturer failed. (See European models.)
Our findings offer added evidence of problems with LATCH, the federally mandated attachment system for child car seats. Most car seats performed worse with LATCH than with vehicle safety belts. And LATCH attachments aren’t always easy to use.
One federal agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, regulates both vehicles and child car seats. Why aren’t car seats tested as rigorously as cars?


NHTSA spokesman Rae Tyson says the U.S. car-seat standard is rigorous and that side-crash tests are problematic. For side crashes, “our engineers do not have a performance test they’re comfortable with,” he says.



TOUGHER SAFETY TESTS


Our new tests are tougher than the federal car-seat standard because a significant performance gap exists between vehicles and the car seats they carry.


The federal New Car Assessment Program tests most cars and minivans, and some pickups and SUVs, in 35-mph frontal crashes and 38-mph side crashes. Scores in the form of “star” ratings are widely publicized, and as a result carmakers have improved the crash protection of vehicles. There has been no such incentive for the makers of child car seats sold in the U.S.


The infant seats we evaluated are rear-facing carriers that snap in and out of a base. The base connects to the car by means of the vehicle’s safety belts or LATCH attachments. (LATCH, which stands for Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children, includes belts that hook the base to metal anchors in the car.)


We crash-tested multiple units of each infant seat. In some crashes we used vehicle safety belts to secure the base; in other tests we used LATCH attachments. The collisions mimic a crash in a Ford Explorer SUV, a popular family vehicle. (The Toyota Camry sedan crumples similarly, especially in a side crash, so we would expect comparable results for some sedans.)


We used a test dummy weighing the maximum claimed weight for each seat. That’s 30 pounds for the Graco SafeSeat and 22 pounds for the others.


In our 35-mph front-impact test, seven car seats failed. They separated from their bases, rotated too far, or would have inflicted grave injuries, as measured by our test dummy, whose sensors record the severity of impact. We retested these to see whether they passed the 30-mph federal standard. All passed except the Evenflo Discovery.


When we performed side-impact tests at 38 mph, eight models failed. Four of the seats flew out of their bases.


Three seats failed all our tough tests: the Evenflo Discovery, the Graco SafeSeat, and the Britax Companion, formerly our top-rated seat based on earlier tests that mirrored the federal standard. Most other tested seats passed either the front- or side-crash test in some configuration, though only the Baby Trend Flex-Loc and the Graco SnugRide with EPS passed all our tests. (EPS stands for expanded polystyrene, a cushioning material.)


Some Britax Companion seats were recalled in October 2006 because carriers were assembled incorrectly; we tested a later model. The Evenflo Discovery, which we deem Not Acceptable and believe should be recalled, was the subject of a NHTSA investigation in 2004 after the agency received seven reports about the carrier separating from its base. (Evenflo received 52 reports, 6 involving fatalities, NHTSA says.) NHTSA said it could not identify a safety defect and closed the investigation.


The Eddie Bauer Comfort infant seat also had problems, specifically in our fit-to-vehicle test of one of two bases sold with the seat. Because of that test result we judge the seat Not Acceptable and believe the base should be recalled.


Our trained car-seat installers could not get the base to fit securely in five different vehicles. The seat also performed poorly in our side-crash tests. The company Web site indicated that our model included a new and improved base.


The Web site was wrong, which we learned when we later bought another sample of the seat and discovered a different base that fit better. We have also learned that the manufacturer will supply that base through a “customer satisfaction program” but only to those consumers who know to complain to the company. The car seat (also called the Caress Comfort) is being discontinued though it is still sold. We're crash-testing the seat with the other base. Results will be posted in our Ratings in the coming months.



ONGOING PROBLEMS WITH LATCH


No car seat can provide good protection if it’s not installed right, something that the LATCH system was devised to address. A tight fit is important for crash protection, and our testers find that you are more likely to get a secure fit with LATCH than with vehicle safety belts. Nevertheless, the car-seat tests underscore continuing problems. For example, more seats failed when attached with LATCH than with safety belts, even when the installation was done by professionals. The same has been true in our previous car-seat tests.


Our tests suggest that infant car seats might be better secured if their bases were attached to floorboard anchor points in addition to existing LATCH anchors. Another improvement would be for the U.S. standard to allow for car-seat bases similar to many sold in Europe. They include a “foot” that adds stability in a frontal crash.

VICTIMS Matthew Gallardo was killed and his older cousin, Arron, was injured in a side crash in which Matthew was ejected from his car seat. Below, Carlye Siebens holds her son, Landon, who was bruised in a collision when his car seat separated from its base.



Another problem with LATCH is that anchors in many cars are hard to access. And most vehicles don’t have LATCH anchors in the safest seat in the car: the center rear. It can also be hard to adjust safety belts to a car seat located in the center rear.


General Motors vehicles are an exception; many have center LATCH anchors. And some Ford models allow parents to use the inner two LATCH anchors from the outer seats to install a child seat in the center rear.


NHTSA spokesman Tyson says the agency will hold a public hearing on LATCH probably in February; the date had not been set as of press time. LATCH has been successful, he says, but there are concerns. “The problem we have now,” he says, “is parents who are not installing the seats properly.”



REAL-WORLD COLLISIONS


All states and the District of Columbia require infants to be secured in car seats when traveling in passenger vehicles. Still, 572 infants under 1 year old were killed in traffic accidents from 2001 to 2005, with side crashes accounting for 151 of those deaths, or 26 percent, NHTSA data show.


No one is saying that a car-seat standard with side-crash tests would prevent all deaths and injuries from side impacts. Still, the families of some victims say it would be an improvement.


Mary and John Gallardo’s grandson, Matthew, was one of those victims. In March 2004, Matthew’s infant seat flew off its base in a side-impact crash on U.S. 49 in Harrison County, Miss., and he was ejected from the car. The Gallardos’ daughter, Candace, was also killed and another grandson, Arron, was injured. “This was devastating,” says John Gallardo, who wants car seats made so that they better withstand side crashes. “We just want to help see that no one else has to suffer what my family went through.”


Carlye Siebens and her son Landon were luckier. In May 2006, after securing Landon in his car seat, Siebens pulled out from a stop sign near her home in Deland, Fla. Her car was broadsided, and Landon, then 7 months, suffered bruises and minor cuts when his car seat separated from its base and he landed face down. “The first thing I did was look in my mirror to check on my child, and he wasn’t where he had been,” Siebens says. “You assume the car seat would have been intact.”



WHAT YOU CAN DO


Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports, strongly believes that NHTSA should strengthen safety testing for car seats so that it is comparable with the tests conducted on new cars. That means including a side-crash test. If the New Car Assessment Program is any indication, crash performance improves when results are publicized.


The agency also needs to revisit the LATCH standard. Automakers should make anchors and tethers easy to access. And LATCH anchors should be required in center-rear seats.


For now, here’s how to keep your baby as safe as possible while traveling:
If you’re shopping for an infant car seat, buy one of the two we recommend. (See the Ratings.)
If you already own a Chicco KeyFit, Compass I410, Evenflo Embrace, or Peg Perego Primo Viaggio SIP, use it with vehicle safety belts, which passed our tests, not with LATCH, which didn’t. If you can’t get a tight fit with the safety belt, buy one of the two seats we recommend.
If you own a different infant seat, consider replacing it with the Baby Trend Flex-Loc or the Graco SnugRide with EPS.
Secure your child in the center-rear seat if the car seat can be tightly fastened there. Go to www.nhtsa.gov to find a free car-seat inspection station near you.
Send in the registration card that comes with new car seats, so that the manufacturer can contact you if the seat is recalled.
Remember that any child car seat is better than no seat at all.


Source: Consumers Union, www.consumerreports.org and the February, 2007 issue of Consumer Reports

[Synchro246]

Thanks for posting the report.

Do you think consumer reports is going to test convertable seats similarly?
This is a stupid question: do you think the results of this may indicate that convertable seats are safer?

[jen_nah]

I haven't read the full article just yet but based on the responses from Britax & Evenflo (which I HATE their infant carriers anyways). I think it's wrong that they haven't allowed the car seat manufactures to see their protocalls & testing data. How are these manufactures going to make the proper changes if there is truly something wrong with their seats if they can't see the issue.

I believe Britax & Chicco go above & beyond in their testing and find it odd the Companion & KeyFit to fail. I would really like to see more of their testing.

I did miss the show. Did they show all these seats fail?

This is going to start a panic just like the Kyle video did. So hold on tight techs as we gear up for round 2.

[RubysGirl]

side crashes.. if you go to the cr website they have a video of the discovery. Many left the bases. The thing is american seats aren't tested for side impact, it's not part of the standard, so even if britax and chicco go above and beyond, that doesn't automatically mean they're doing side impact testing. yk?

[jen_nah]

side crashes.. if you go to the cr website they have a video of the discovery. Many left the bases. The thing is american seats aren't tested for side impact, it's not part of the standard, so even if britax and chicco go above and beyond, that doesn't automatically mean they're doing side impact testing. yk?

I agree side impact is not part of standard testing. But, Britax & Chicco have said for years they do side impact testing. That is why I am questioning CR testing protocall. CR did this last year with the MA & LATCH and over rotation with a child at the upper rear facing weight limit. They didn't take other factors in place like a seatback in front of the seat to prevent the over rotation. The didn't take into place a child at 33lbs doesn't need to be at a full 45 degree recline. They also didn't take into place bracing. Again a lot of factors weren't taken into consideration. So, I just question CR testing after some of their questionable reviews in the past.

[LuvBug03]

but britax does test side impacts, how else would they be able to create their side impact seats?

[jen_nah]

Can anyone else get the video on CR site to work? I can't get it to work and it's driving me NUTS now that I read the article. I want to see these seats in action.

[jengold]

I am so disturbed by these findings... my 6 month old is in a Graco Infant SafeSeat which I purchased after much research and discussions. The article recommends buying a new infant car seat if you have one of those 4. What would you all do.... should I just move him to a convertible? I also have a 3 year old Peg Preggo (it was used for 2 previous kids)which I guess I could use (installing with seat belt) until I purchase a new convertible. What would you all do? I still can not believe the SafeSeat did so poorly.... so many people use that car seat.

[Jeanum]

It plays okay for me. It's a very short 30 second clip showing the Discovery tumbling to the side of the test bench, no other seats are shown.

[jengold]

Have you all seen the recently released Consumer Report Infant Car Seat Crash test results. Most of the infant car seats failed. If you go to Consumerreports.org you can read the article. I am so disturbed by these findings... my 6 month old is in a Graco Infant SafeSeat which I purchased after much research and discussions. The article recommends buying a new infant car seat if you have one of those 4 (one being the Graco SafeSeat). What would you all do.... should I just move him to a convertible? I also have a 3 year old Peg Preggo (it was used for 2 previous kids)which I guess I could use (installing with seat belt) until I purchase a new convertible. What would you all do? I still can not believe the SafeSeat did so poorly.... so many people use that car seat.

Thanks so much for your help.

[RubysGirl]

I would just go to a convertable myself, but one thing to consider is they used a 30lb dummy vs the 22lb dummy they used for the other seats. That's a lot more weight. I think they should have tested at 22lbs to show a comparison on how it performs to the other seats. For all we know the safeseat could perform better than all the others with a 22lb dummy.

[wendytthomas]

First, I would take the magazine, roll it up, and use it to light a fire.

Never listen to anything CR says about car seats. If you are looking for a new microwave, fine. A new washing machine, perhaps. College funding, maybe. A cell phone, wonderful. But go screaming into the night when they do car seats (in facts techs have been awaiting the onslaught of questions just like yours). CR doesn't release how they do their testing, or what any of it really means. Manufacturers have to test to the NHTSA's level. They do their own testing, and it's trustworthy because the NHTSA comes along behind and does some testing and if they find something wrong there's a recall put out, and you know what bad press a recall is. Even for something minor. So the manufacturers do their own testing all to the same federal standard and we all know what comes out of it. No one has any idea how CR tests, or what their results mean.

If your seat is used properly for your child, is installed in the car properly, and you like it, then continue using it. The Safeseat is a wonderful seat. All seats out there have passed Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 213 (that's the one that pertains to car seats, 225 is LATCH, and 208 are car safety standards like the seatbelt and such) and so provided they're used properly every seat out there is as safe as the next. The $40 Scenera is just as safe as the $300 Britax Boulevard. Safer, if the Scenera is properly installed and used and the Britax isn't.

Enjoy your seat. It's a fun one. :-)

Wendy

[jengold]

You are correct about the dummy size.

I should probably just move him to the convertible. I was hoping to wait until he sits up better but now feel like the safeseat is anything but safe!

I have a Britax Marathon for my 2 year old, and have liked it. Would you all recommend the Marathon over the Boulevard? Are the safety ratings the same?

[wendytthomas]

You are correct about the dummy size.

I should probably just move him to the convertible. I was hoping to wait until he sits up better but now feel like the safeseat is anything but safe!

I have a Britax Marathon for my 2 year old, and have liked it. Would you all recommend the Marathon over the Boulevard? Are the safety ratings the same?

The Marathon and Boulevard are both very safe seats. Both have side impact protection, EPS foam, wide harnesses that don't twist, lots of good things. The Boulevard has the head wings and adjustable headrest, which is nice. Safety wise, ease wise, and sleeping comfort wise. But you'll lose a little harness height on the Boulevard.

It's up to you. They both perform very well, just like any other seat that's used properly. :-)

Wendy

[jengold]

Wendy
Thanks so much for your reply.... I was worried about even driving down my driveway with my son in the SafeSeat.

Just wondering, but in your opinion are convertible seats safer than the infant carriers? I have always worried about them popping out and rebounding in an accident. I am still inclined to move my 6 month old to a convertible car seat sooner.

Thanks again
Jen

[jen_nah]

You are correct about the dummy size.

I should probably just move him to the convertible. I was hoping to wait until he sits up better but now feel like the safeseat is anything but safe!

I have a Britax Marathon for my 2 year old, and have liked it. Would you all recommend the Marathon over the Boulevard? Are the safety ratings the same?

I wouldn't go move him out of his infant carrier if he still is within the height & weight recommendations for the seat. I esp wouldn't go move him just because Consumer Reports put out a bad article.

Trust me this isn't the first time they have done with and have not released their testing or data to car seat manufactures. They did this last year to the Marathon but failed to take into account a lot of real world (aka: our vehicles) factors. So, Take what CR says with a grain of salt and keep using your SafeSeat as long as your child is within the weight & height recommendations and you have it installed per your vehicle & car seat manufacture guidelines. If you are in doubt seek the help of a child passenger safety tech in your area to check your installation and how your using it.

The safest car seat for your child is one that fits your child, fits your vehicle & that you use correctly each and every single time.

[wendytthomas]

Wendy
Thanks so much for your reply.... I was worried about even driving down my driveway with my son in the SafeSeat.

Just wondering, but in your opinion are convertible seats safer than the infant carriers? I have always worried about them popping out and rebounding in an accident. I am still inclined to move my 6 month old to a convertible car seat sooner.

Thanks again
Jen

What Jenny said above. If your son fits and you use it properly, then feel free to continue using it.

It's supposed to rebound. :-) That's what infant seats do. The only one on the US market I believe that doesn't is the Britax Companion with the anti-rebound bar. Otherwise every infant seat will rebound toward the back during a collision. It's designed that way, and it's fine.

Is a convertible safer? Depends. Does your son fit in it well? Harness snug, at or below his shoulders, recline angle good for him? If so, then he's fine to be in it. If he's short torsoed and the lowest harness slots are still a bit above his shoulders (Britax has ok'ed I think a half inch or so for the harness to be above the shoulders, but only if you have the harness done very snugly), or if you can't get it to work properly, then he's safer in the infant seat.

If you're not comfortable with him in the infant seat, and he fits in the convertible, there's nothing wrong with moving him. If you're just freaked by the CR article and want to move him on that basis, if he fits, then fine. If not, then take the magazine and..... shred it for the cats to piss on. Probably a fitting end.

Whatever your choice, provided your son fits and the seat is installed properly and you're using it properly, it's safe and it's your choice.

(don't you hate that techs don't give you yes or no answers? LOL)

Wendy

[CPSDarren]

Thanks for posting the report.

Do you think consumer reports is going to test convertable seats similarly?
This is a stupid question: do you think the results of this may indicate that convertable seats are safer?


I do not know when the next test of convertible seats is. Without knowing anything about how they test, it is impossible to say if they would perform better in general. One factor that could help convertible seats is that they don't have the same detachable carrier that apparently separated in many of the Consumer Reports tests.

[CPSDarren]

Does it work for you if you go to their home page and access the article that way? A while back they changed their website making it more difficult to link to individual pages:-(

[jengold]

Thank you again Wendy

I am totally reacting to the CR article. I am actually a Neuropsychologists and see tons of head injuries secondary to car accidents so am neurotic about car seats. I am fairly confident the SafeSeat is installed correctly (have had the police dept check it) and my son is in the seat correctly. I really appreciate your feedback and will continue using the safe seat until I orginally planned on moving him to a convertible.

One other question (you have been very helpful)... I check my carseats very regularly to make sure they are installed well and the SafeSeat does seem to need to be tighten more than my 2 year olds Marathon. I have it installed using LATCH.. any suggestions??
Thanks again
Jen

[CPSDarren]

I wouldn't take any immediate action based on testing by Consumer Reports. It's so hard to trust them on child restraint issues given their history. They may turn out to be right that some of these models have a serious safety flaw. If that is the case, the most reasonable action would probably be to buy a convertible seat. You'd be needing one of those eventually, anyway.

The reality is that rear-facing seats are extremely safe if used correctly. I don't know of any studies that have shown any incidence of serious injuries or fatalities due to infant carriers of any kind. Certainly if there was an epidemic of infants seats causing severe injuries, there would be a lot of press. It's quite possible that the crash tests simply don't correlate to real world failures. The tests may still show a design weakness, but not necessarily one that is causing injuries. As is always the case, there are so many unknowns about Consumer Reports' methods that we can't make any solid conclusions

[wendytthomas]

Thank you again Wendy

I am totally reacting to the CR article. I am actually a Neuropsychologists and see tons of head injuries secondary to car accidents so am neurotic about car seats. I am fairly confident the SafeSeat is installed correctly (have had the police dept check it) and my son is in the seat correctly. I really appreciate your feedback and will continue using the safe seat until I orginally planned on moving him to a convertible.

One other question (you have been very helpful)... I check my carseats very regularly to make sure they are installed well and the SafeSeat does seem to need to be tighten more than my 2 year olds Marathon. I have it installed using LATCH.. any suggestions??
Thanks again
Jen

When you went to the police department was it a certified technician doing the check, or was it just a guy who does car seats? Big difference.

I would be a little concerned with your safeseat loosening. What position in the car is it in (passenger, driver, middle) and what car do you drive, model make and year? I haven't heard of a problem with it at all. A little loosening over time is normal, but how often are you talking about? Every week, every month, or in the six months you've been using it you've retightened it 50 times?

Ok, I'm curious, what does a neuropsycholoist do? We were supposed to see one for a follow up a year after Piper took a tumble out of our second story window. I think hers was supposed to be a pediatric neuropsychologist, and I just remember thinking that that had to be about as specialized as you could get. We never went, she was fine within two weeks of the fall, so a year later it was but a distant memory (for another nine months when epilepsy reared its head anyway). But I've been curious as to what neuropsychologists do.

Wendy

[jengold]

Wendy
It was a certified installer, the car seat is in the rear driver (my 2 year old is in rear passanger). I have a 2006 Nissan Murano. In 6 months I have tightened it 2-3X, it is just that my sons seems to never loosen. I do have it installed with LATCH (I am able to get a much tighter fit with LATCH than the seat belt).

Regarding Neuropsychology... I primarily see adults now but my specialty is head injuries and epilepsy. I do some pediatrics. A clinical neuropsychologists basically assess cognitive functioning (i.e. memory, language, problem solving, visual spatial skills etc) in relation to brain functioning. Feel free to send me a private message and I will give you my e-mail address and I can answer questions more specifically.

Thanks again for your help
Jen

[wendytthomas]

Wendy
It was a certified installer, the car seat is in the rear driver (my 2 year old is in rear passanger). I have a 2006 Nissan Murano. In 6 months I have tightened it 2-3X, it is just that my sons seems to never loosen. I do have it installed with LATCH (I am able to get a much tighter fit with LATCH than the seat belt).

Regarding Neuropsychology... I primarily see adults now but my specialty is head injuries and epilepsy. I do some pediatrics. A clinical neuropsychologists basically assess cognitive functioning (i.e. memory, language, problem solving, visual spatial skills etc) in relation to brain functioning. Feel free to send me a private message and I will give you my e-mail address and I can answer questions more specifically.

Thanks again for your help
Jen

Hmm, don't know about the loosening. It's not so often that it's alarming. And we move Piper's seat around often enough that it's hard to tell if hers would loosen. LOL It doesn't in my husband's car. I don't know, though.

Very interesting. I figured that's kind of what you guys did. Piper was 23 months when she fell and before we left the hospital two days later she was learning new words, she knew who people were who were visiting, she remembered what color cars Nathan and I drove, the names of our cats, all things. The psychologist who helped us on the floor wrote a glowing report, the neurosurgeon who came after her second cat scan said that she looked just fine for a kid who had fallen out of a first story window (Uh, it was a second story window. OH. She's fine). The epilepsy took us very much by surprise. She had done so well in the hospital we thought she'd have nothing out of it. Luckily with the exception of the static epilepticus that alerted it to us, they're small staring spells. She's on 100 mg lamictal/day and that's taken care of them. Before the medication they were about 10-20 seconds long, on the medication at a lower dose they were about 5 seconds long (only I noticed them, basically) and now they're non existent.

People are always surprised to hear of it with her, though. She is so stinking smart it's not even funny. She fell, she has epilepsy, but she is still so lucky. With what could have happened, and with what has happened, she's done amazingly well. She's reading, she runs, jumps, you should see her do gymnastics, she asks all sorts of questions. Her brain has to be so busy if it's learning so much and still going on around the seizures (they're in her right parietal lobe, it's a contrecoup injury, her face was bruised on her left temple).

Anyway, I'm rambling.

Wendy

[Morganthe]

The article on the website is listed for the Feb 2007 issue. I was there earlier today reading the Jan 2007 which automatically appears as 'current issue'. I couldn't get the link from here to work, so I went to the CU home page. The only way it would come up is if I clicked on the photo for the article. Tomorrow might have all the bugs out to get to the newer issue.

There are testing results and discussions for the other carseat categories on the sidebar -- Convertible, Toddler, Booster. I wasn't impressed with some of their model choices, but oh well.

There is also a link to a discussion about European seats & testing vs US. I thought it was humourous that they talked about the "foot extension" instead of ever refering to the system as the ISO. :rolleyes:

I also get a kick out of their "Trained Experts" --- not actually 'certified Experts'? Then again, I figure these installers were reading and actually trying harder to install a correct carseat than the average parent would know to do. IMO, it should be stupid easy to install a car seat. A no brainer.
I just saw a commercial advertising features in a vehicle -- a lighted cupholder and a detachable overhead light were prominently pointed out. Ease of use for car seats should be more important than cupholders!!
Ok -- rant over :p

[CPSDarren]

Unless CR somehow rigged or unfairly performed its tests, it is scary that some seats separated while others remained intact. While I've had many criticisms of their past car seat reviews, they have identified some legitimate safety flaws over the years.

I still don't put much trust in their "crash protection" scores. On the other hand, I do suspect that there may be some merit in the findings that indicate complete failures in testing, though. Given that side impact testing is not a part of any federal safety standard for carseats, their testing is essentially the first published results we've seen for restraints in the USA. They are to be commended for that, at least.

[emandbri]

I'm also freaked out over this and have a 5 month old in a safe seat. I'm considering using the seat without the base or moving her to a decathalon that I'm currently using in dh's car.

Emily

[emandbri]

but britax does test side impacts, how else would they be able to create their side impact seats?

Consumer reports tested them in a 38 mph maybe they test them at lower speeds.

[Kellyr2]

Does anyone know if Graco has done their own side impact testing? While I don't put any more stock into CR than anyone else here, and am trying not to let this bother me at all, it's bugging me a bit. I mean, it rated poorly on both latch and seatbelt - I just want to know how they tested it to get it to do that. and the rumor has been (though never confirmed) that Graco did test this seat at a higher speed than what is federally required, but no mention of side crash testing.

[Splash]

According to the SS1 box, it IS tested for side impact. Now, what speed, what angle, what installation, etc is not disclosed, but Graco claims to have tested it for side impacts.
Charlie has outgrown his SS1 for now, so it's a moot point for us. However I will use it again for the next baby unless and until there are some hard facts telling me that it is an unsafe seat.

[twokidstwodogs]

I am hardly going to say that CR's testing methods are perfect, but they *are* a legitimate (and influential) source of consumer information. I would trust their tests over those done by most manufacturers. At least CR is unbiased and has no profit motive. I'm a longtime subscriber to CR, and I do not normally found them to be sensationalist or hankering for a news story. I'm guessing that they ran these tests as best they could, and were pretty horrified by the results. If manufacturers think that the tests were flawed, they will undoubtedly tell CR, and CR will likely run them again and report on the results later. That's what they usually do. Meanwhile, if I had an infant in one of those seats and it weren't a financial hardship, I'd buy a different one. CR might be wrong, but my gosh, what if they're right?

[twokidstwodogs]

. Given that side impact testing is not a part of any federal safety standard for carseats, their testing is essentially the first published results we've seen for restraints in the USA. They are to be commended for that, at least.

Just wanted to add: all the responses from manufacturers and the JPMA seem to be focused on the higher-speed frontal tests that CR ran. Has anyone had anything to say about the CR side impact test?

If nothing else, maybe this will encourage the feds to mandate side impact testing of child seats. If I remember correctly, it's in side impact crashes that extended rear-facing shows the most benefits, and also where highback boosters outperform backless boosters. Given the fatality rates in side impact crashes, it would be really nice to see more federal attention to this issue.

[CPSDarren]

This is from the Partners for Child Passenger Safety, a collaboration of researchers funded by the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and State Farm. It is one of the leading organizations in CPS research.


This month's issue of Consumer Reports (CR) features an article
questioning the performance of certain rear-facing infant car seats,
particularly with respect to the use of LATCH to secure the infant seat
base to the vehicle's seat. The high-severity frontal and side sled
tests conducted by Consumers Union in the lab found that most car seats
performed poorly in either one or both of the tests and performed worse
when attached to the vehicle using LATCH than they did when attached
with the vehicle's seat belt.

- The Partners for Child Passenger Safety (PCPS) research team
at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia supports the need for
further research into the effectiveness of LATCH to protect children of
all ages. As LATCH becomes more prevalent, we will be able to conduct
analyses of the effectiveness of LATCH to protect children in real-world
crashes. The PCPS team further supports the development of a side impact
test procedure for child restraints that accurately simulates real world
crash conditions. In the meantime, it is important for parents to place
findings such as those reported in CR in perspective: children riding in
the correct restraint for their age and size are far safer than if they
were not restrained at all, or in a restraint that is inappropriate for
their age or size.

- The most current data from PCPS, which is the largest
available source of information on children involved in real world
crashes, shows:

· Less than one percent of crashes reported to PCPS since
1997 involved infants in rear-facing seats in side-impact crashes. Among
these cases, the risk of injury was less than one-half of one percent
– with no evidence of a difference whether the seat was attached by
LATCH or by the vehicle seat belt. It is important to note, however,
that injuries sustained by these children were not necessarily caused by
a child restraint that came loose, as was seen in the tests conducted by
Consumer's Union.

· Previous PCPS analyses indicate that side impact crashes
generally have higher injury rates than frontal impacts for all
passengers, including children restrained in child restraints. Children
in forward-facing restraints in side-impact crashes showed a few common
characteristics of the crashes that resulted in injury: intrusion into
the child's occupant space, a frontal component of the crash (rather
than a 90-degree side-impact collision); and rotation of the child
restraint towards the side of impact. Many of these characteristics are
challenging to simulate in a sled test like the one implemented by
Consumers Union.

[jen_nah]

I am hardly going to say that CR's testing methods are perfect, but they *are* a legitimate (and influential) source of consumer information. I would trust their tests over those done by most manufacturers. At least CR is unbiased and has no profit motive. I'm a longtime subscriber to CR, and I do not normally found them to be sensationalist or hankering for a news story. I'm guessing that they ran these tests as best they could, and were pretty horrified by the results. If manufacturers think that the tests were flawed, they will undoubtedly tell CR, and CR will likely run them again and report on the results later. That's what they usually do. Meanwhile, if I had an infant in one of those seats and it weren't a financial hardship, I'd buy a different one. CR might be wrong, but my gosh, what if they're right?

Then why has CR never shown their crash data & protocalls the manufactures to see how and what is occuring to cause their seats to fail? They say they have car seat installers but never say if they are trained techs. This is what worries some of us. Are they actually installing the seats correctly? Again, There is a lot of what "if's" to their testing and so I as does the CPS world find their testings to be less then creditable when it comes to car seats.

[CPSDarren]

At least CR is unbiased and has no profit motive.

This is a common misconception. CR may not biased by advertising revenue, but that does not mean they are unbiased. Every organization has a bias from its editors and directors. Every organization is affected by revenue, for-profits and non-profits alike. CR must sell subscriptions to its magazine and online services to exist. That is a very large source of potential bias.

Keep in mind that manufacturers do have a profit motive but that is not always a bad thing. Products that require huge recalls and incur lawsuits are not going to be profitable, especially in the child restraint industry that is not a high-margin product.

I'm hesitant to put any significant trust in any manufacturer or agency that hides its methods in secrecy. CR may have made in important discovery with these tests. It's too bad they don't have the reputation in the CPS community that brings trust with it. Instead, we have to wait for more independent confirmation on a possible product flaw with life-or-death implications.

[Synchro246]

I wouldn't want them to show their protocols before the tests.
Disclosing the data in it's entirety to EVERYONE after the tests and evaluation is important though.

[twokidstwodogs]

Do they never release their testing protocols to the manufacturers? If not, that's definitely a problem (as well as counterproductive--how are the manufacturers supposed to fix the safety problems, as you point out?)

On the other hand, I also don't see manufacturers giving people a whole lot of information about how *they* test their seats. Does Graco test for side impact at all? If so, why couldn't they just counter CR with the results of their *own* side impact tests?

I'm not necessarily bothered by the fact that CR may not use CPSTs, or at least not exclusively. Yes, they should test the seats to see whether they fail when properly installed, but as we all know, real world usage matters too. It's not hard to get a seat to lock into a base. If the seats are coming loose from the base, surely that's a problem with the seat mechanism, not the install.

[stayinhomewithmy4]

Unless CR somehow rigged or unfairly performed its tests, it is scary that some seats separated while others remained intact. While I've had many criticisms of their past car seat reviews, they have identified some legitimate safety flaws over the years.

I still don't put much trust in their "crash protection" scores. On the other hand, I do suspect that there may be some merit in the findings that indicate complete failures in testing, though. Given that side impact testing is not a part of any federal safety standard for carseats, their testing is essentially the first published results we've seen for restraints in the USA. They are to be commended for that, at least.

I'm glad that someone else feels this way about CR. Whenever I am in the market for a new seat, it is hard for me to not be influenced by CR Reports because they are the only results we, as consumers, get to see. Don't get me wrong: I don't buy seats based solely on CR's findings, but it does usually play a role in what I choose to buy. If I were in the market for an infant seat right now, I absolutely would not buy the Evenflo Discovery or the others that came off the base, and if I currently owned one of those seats I would stop using the base and use the seatbelt to install just the seat part every time. I really hope that NHTSA will strengthen the safety standards and include side impact testing for car seats, and maybe this CR article will push them to do so.

[jen_nah]

Do they never release their testing protocols to the manufacturers? If not, that's definitely a problem (as well as counterproductive--how are the manufacturers supposed to fix the safety problems, as you point out?)

On the other hand, I also don't see manufacturers giving people a whole lot of information about how *they* test their seats. Does Graco test for side impact at all? If so, why couldn't they just counter CR with the results of their *own* side impact tests?

I'm not necessarily bothered by the fact that CR may not use CPSTs, or at least not exclusively. Yes, they should test the seats to see whether they fail when properly installed, but as we all know, real world usage matters too. It's not hard to get a seat to lock into a base. If the seats are coming loose from the base, surely that's a problem with the seat mechanism, not the install.

We are not saying there may not be a design flaw with some of these seats. What we are saying is how do we truly know if there is one if they don't provide the car seat manufactures their data to review.

Yes, Graco does SI crash testing. Can't say for sure about Evenflo or Dorel. I am sure they do provide their crash testing to those that needed it ex: NHTSA. But, Not to us lyman folk that I am aware of.

From what I have read & heard CR never turned over their data when the failed the MA last spring when using LATCH and at a higher weight limit. Britax requested the data but last I heard they never received it. Britax has tried to reduplicate CR findings and has no been able too.

As for installation yes it does make a huge differance in performance. If a seat is not installed and used correctly then how is it supposed to protect the child. That is clear as day and something we have "ALWAY" stressed. So, By them not saying on way or the other that they have a trained & cert. tech doing the installation it doesn't hold a lot of weight with me.

[CPSDarren]

I have been told that they do have certified techs on staff. Of course, we still don't know anything about their methods. Techs vary considerably and the methods given them by their employer may not be consistent with those from their training.

There are too many unknowns when the whole process is cloaked in some proprietary veil of secrecy, as it always has been. They may be right, they may be wrong. There's simply not enough information for a consumer to make an informed choice, yet.

[CPSDarren]

I would also tend to avoid the purchase of a model that had a serious failure, such as breakage or separation. As I said, their relative ratings have no meaning for me since we don't know their methods. On the other hand, when some seats pass a test while others break loose completely, that is something that makes an impression.

If I owned one of these seats, I would also at least consider installing it with the seatbelt and/or without the base until more information becomes available.

Worst case, I would purchase a convertible seat and use it rear-facing, since I would need one of those anyway, once the baby outgrew the infant carrier.

Given the unknowns in their testing and methods, throwing out an infant seat and replacing it with one that scored better seems like a very unnecessary waste of money to me.

[twokidstwodogs]

This is a common misconception. CR may not biased by advertising revenue, but that does not mean they are unbiased. Every organization has a bias from its editors and directors. Every organization is affected by revenue, for-profits and non-profits alike. CR must sell subscriptions to its magazine and online services to exist. That is a very large source of potential bias.

Keep in mind that manufacturers do have a profit motive but that is not always a bad thing. Products that require huge recalls and incur lawsuits are not going to be profitable, especially in the child restraint industry that is not a high-margin product.

Darren you are (as usual!) absolutely right on both points. CR does have biases. (My father, who is a CR fan and has subscribed for decades, is convinced they are biased in favor of Japanese cars and against American cars.) And certainly manufacturers of juvenile products have major liability concerns, probably more so than manufacturers of anything else. This gives them a serious incentive to make sure that all their products are up to all federal and state safety regulations. But I don't know that they have an incentive to go beyond those regulations, particularly when they're not sure the results will be favorable. I'm thinking of how much the tobacco companies were hurt by their internal research showing the dangers of smoking. If Graco has internal research that shows mixed side impact crash test results, that could hurt them more than if they had never done the research to begin with.

Certainly, the best source of information is something like PCPS/CHOP, and I'm glad you posted their response. But they don't have a lot of data on this, particularly on the LATCH. (That, of course, is good! We don't want lots of child injury/fatality data.) Isn't this CR article the only publicly available data we have on child seat performance in side impact tests? It's undoubtedly flawed in many ways, and undoubtedly, techs shouldn't be making recommendations on the basis of it. But it's something, from a reasonably reliable organization. That's enough to take it seriously. I'm pretty horrified by any seat coming off its base in any reasonable crash test. If manufacturers are sure their seats won't in fact do that, let's see *them* produce some evidence for it. Saying that their seats conform to all federal regulations, like Graco did, isn't enough when there are no applicable federal regulations.

I remember when CR came out with that report that showed the RF MA rotating too much when installed with LATCH and used with the upper weight limits. As a MA owner and the parent of big kiddos, I was concerned. I read a post by Julie/Joolsplus that pointed out some of the flaws of that test, particularly the fact that in real life, downward rotation is limited by the seat in front of it. That was enough to make me believe that the LATCH installation would be safe in my car. But you know what? When my daughter hits the 30 lb RF limit on her RA and I move her to the MA for those extra three pounds, I'll still install it with the seatbelt. I know I can get a good installation and it will take me all of three extra minutes. Is that necessary? No. Does it make me feel better? Yes. But I have told my good friend, who's terrible at carseat installations, to ignore CR on that and keep her RF MA installed with LATCH.

I sincerely hope that someone can come up with equally good explanations for why seats were coming off their bases in the CR reports. Meanwhile, I'm eagerly awaiting my latest CR in the mail!

[CPSDarren]

In the case of these tests, just because they are the only public tests of their kind does not by itself make them legitimate. They do deserve praise for pushing forward for this kind of testing, though. CR is not immune to hype. The whole Suzuki Samurai debacle was allegedly greatly exaggerated, supposedly at a time when CR was having financial problems.

Their reliability ratings also exaggerate small differences, making it seem like there are huge differences among vehicles and that sells a lot of issues alone. Did you know that the difference in projected reliability between an above average new model (half red circle) and a below average one (half black circle) is less than one problem (on average) over all of the first three years of ownership? Most people don't, because they bury that information in favor of data normalized to small averages.

CR is certainly not beyond reproach, especially in the area of child passenger safety where they have not participated in the community or developed any degree of trust. That's not to say their tests are bad, but they are a big unknown. I'm also swayed by seeing major failures like breakage and detachment, so at least for some tested models there does seem to be a design issue. Even if that issue is not resulting in any (or many) serious injuries or fatalties, it is now public and gives room for improvement.

[joolsplus3]

I am hardly going to say that CR's testing methods are perfect, but they *are* a legitimate (and influential) source of consumer information. I would trust their tests over those done by most manufacturers. At least CR is unbiased and has no profit motive. I'm a longtime subscriber to CR, and I do not normally found them to be sensationalist or hankering for a news story. I'm guessing that they ran these tests as best they could, and were pretty horrified by the results. If manufacturers think that the tests were flawed, they will undoubtedly tell CR, and CR will likely run them again and report on the results later. That's what they usually do. Meanwhile, if I had an infant in one of those seats and it weren't a financial hardship, I'd buy a different one. CR might be wrong, but my gosh, what if they're right?

The seat manufacturers KNOW they can be sued mercilessly for any seat failure (Evenflo got slapped with an 8.5 million dollar lawsuit, even though the caregiver testified in court that she had knowingly misused the seat in order to try to hurt the child in it, for example). I think that's enough financial incentive (I don't know if they care diddly for the fate of children) to work hard to be sure their seats won't fail in a variety of crashes.

I agree CR acts well as a gadfly to get the public interested, but their results scream sensationalism and magazine sales on this topic, to me.


PS, sorry, didn't read several other posts before writing this, didn't mean to reiterate points made.
:)

[RubysGirl]

I just want to throw something out there. Like Darren said, that some passed their method while others didn't is alarming and it does bring up something I've always thought about. I couldn't wait to move my son to his marathon. Why? Well aside from the added feature of eps foam over the snugride we had, I couldn't help but view the detachable base as "another potential point of failure" Surely I'm not the only one, am I?

I'm really torn, I do feel that infant seats are perfectly designed for newborns, much better/safer than convertables for such a small baby, but I really honestly feel that that shifts sooner rather than later just because there is that added chance.

Oh, and I do think their method is flawed. Aside from not letting manufactuers in on what's going on, I can't believe they only tested the SS1 with a 30lb dummy. For all we know it could've out performed all the others with a 22lb dummy but we'll never know.

[Splash]

Except there is no 30 pound dummy. They either had to weight the smaller one, or use a bigger one over the limits.

[UlrikeDG]

Emily! Congratulations on your new little one! :)

[Kellyr2]

Hey, did anyone else catch that what they recommend the US move to, is a seat with a RF top tether (I can only assume that's what they mean, when they say an anchor that attaches to the floorboard?) and the stability foot? Hmmm... how very interesting.

[CPSDarren]

In theory, those are reasonable suggestions. I had some correspondence with a CR editor a couple years ago. I asked about any data they had to support such recommendations, as I wished to include it in support of extended rear-facing and tethering. They were unable or unwilling to produce any. Since then, I have been unable to find any real world data that supports a major safety advantage for these features. That's not to say there is no advantage, of course. The advantage may be small or there just may not be enough crash incidents with these feautres to make a statistical case for or against them.

[Ahzryn]

Except there is no 30 pound dummy. They either had to weight the smaller one, or use a bigger one over the limits.

Lol, I was just coming here to post this, may as well put it here. If you look at the footage, I could have sworn they put the 30 pound toddle dummy in the SafeSeat, AND THE HEAD IS HANGING OUT OVER THE SHELL!!! I keep looking at it thinking I can't possibly be right, but the more I look, the more I am almost positive that's exactly what they did. It's blantent misuse, and if that's what they did no wonder they had over-rotation and other issues.

Am I nuts, or did anyone else notice that?

Also, anyone have a definitive list of the 4 that separated? I know the Evenflo Discovery is 1, and that it's not the Snugride or the FlexLoc, but that leaves a lot of others :(

[Kellyr2]

Can someone link directly to the video of the SS? I only see the evenflo one on the page with the article.

[Jeanum]

The hard copy of CR just arrived in my mailbox a few minutes ago. The print article appears to be identical to the online version on CR's website. I hoped the print edition would divulge more info. about each seat's performance and the testing methods, but no such luck.

You can go to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16473196/ to get to the link to the NBC news story shown last night and then click on the "Launch" button to show the video. You can catch a glimpse of the SS1 in the video.

[Ahzryn]

Yes, they don't even post the individual videos. The one I am referring to is in a brief shot with four seats simultaneously. I am pretty sure that's the SafeSeat in the lower right hand corner almost at the beginning of the feature that ran on NBC last night (27 seconds in to the 2:30 video clip).

I don't know, maybe I am totally off base.

[sstackho]

I am having a lot of trouble making sense of the recent Consumers Reports article.

Specifically:


A tight fit is important for crash protection, and our testers find that you are more likely to get a secure fit with LATCH than with vehicle safety belts.


and


More seats failed when attached with LATCH than with safety belts, even when the installation was done by professionals. The same has been true in our previous car-seat tests.


Isn't this contradictory? I wish they would give some explanation as to how the LATCH installations are failing.

"Tight fit is important"
"LATCH gives more secure fit"
but "More seats fail with LATCH"

I own a carseat that received a poor rating with LATCH in the CR report, but a good rating with a seatbelt. My seat is currently installed with LATCH. Debating whether to try with a seatbelt fit instead...

Is it an option to install the seat with both LATCH and the belt?

[emandbri]

Emily! Congratulations on your new little one! :)

Thanks!

Emily

[granolamama]

post edited, 'cause I don't know what I'm talking about. ;)

[granolamama]

There is also a link to a discussion about European seats & testing vs US. I thought it was humourous that they talked about the "foot extension" instead of ever refering to the system as the ISO. :rolleyes:

What does ISO stand for?

[CPSDarren]

This is the response from the AAP press release:


The Consumers Union has reported on frontal and side-impact crash tests it
conducted on rear-facing infant-only car safety seats in the February issue
of Consumer Reports. The results of these crash tests are alarming to
parents and pediatricians.

The Consumers Union tested infant-only seats in crash tests that were more
severe than the tests that are required for car safety seats. The Consumers
Union tests included frontal crashes at a speed higher than required for car
safety seats and side-impact crashes, which are not required for car safety
seats. The standards used in these tests are the same as those that are used
in crash-testing most new vehicles.

The report indicates that most infant seats did not perform adequately in
these more severe crash tests. In light of this report, and in consideration
of the concerns parents and pediatricians may have about protecting infant
passengers, the American Academy of Pediatrics offers the following
guidance:

- Parents should continue to use car safety seats on every trip for
every child.

- Parents should read and follow the car safety seat and vehicle
manufacturers' instructions for their car safety seat.

- Car safety seats have been shown to be highly effective in
reducing death and injury due to motor vehicle crashes. According to the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), car safety seats are
71% effective in reducing deaths for infants and 54% effective in reducing
deaths for children ages 1 to 4 years. Belt-positioning booster seats reduce
the risk of injury by 59% for children ages 4 through 7 years. Clearly,
restraining infants and children in the proper car safety seat does help
keep them safe.

- The best seat is one that fits your child, fits your vehicle, and
that you will use correctly on every trip.

- The Academy believes that current standards for testing of car
safety seats are useful and rigorous but that the standards can and should
be improved continually. In addition, car safety seat manufacturers should
strive to enhance the safety of their products on an ongoing basis.

- Certified Child Passenger Safety Technicians are trained in
installing car safety seats properly and can help parents make sure their
children are as safe as possible on the road. To find an inspection station,
visit http://www.seatcheck.org or call toll-free at 866/SEATCHECK
(866/732-8243).

For more information about car safety seats, visit the "Car Safety Seats and
Transportation Safety" Health Topics page.
(http://www.aap.org/healthtopics/carseatsafety.cfm)



http://www.aap.org/family/infantpassengersafety.htm

[Synchro246]

Are any of you CR subscribers planning on writing or calling them with these conserns of disclosure?

[CPSDarren]

Yes, and I did for their last review in 2005 as well.

[Jeanum]

Are any of you CR subscribers planning on writing or calling them with these conserns of disclosure?

Absolutely. Anyone, subscriber or not, can send feedback for that matter. Subscribers with the Feb. '07 print edition are seeing exactly the same article viewable for free up on the website. Everyone who is interested can keep the feedback going. ;)

[Synchro246]

Absolutely. Anyone, subscriber or not, can send feedback for that matter. Subscribers with the Feb. '07 print edition are seeing exactly the same article viewable for free up on the website. Everyone who is interested can keep the feedback going. ;)

Thanks for the tip-- I didn't even know I could view the whole article for free on line. Whatever I am doing I tend to get to a log in page :(

[CPSDarren]

It is generally not recommended to use both LATCH and seatbelt unless allowed in the owner's manual.

As for the CR comments, I can't really give you an answer. Consumer Reports is rarely forthcoming with any details or explanations. They create a lot of hype and hysteria with articles like these, but then leave it to others to field all the questions. It's not a good situation for the public or for the child passenger safety advocates and technicians.

[jebedyah]

Darren, do you have a link for the response from Partners for Child Passenger Safety/CHOP? I can't find it online.

[Kellyr2]

granolamom, the britax companion does NOT have a tether.
sstackho - latch does not necessarily get a tighter fit than a seatbelt. It varies a lot from model to model (of both car and carseat). I do think I get a more secure fit with my Regent with the latch. I have only done seatbelt install once on my MA and still greatly prefer latch on it. I use the seatbelt on my SS because the lockoffs are crazy easy so that's just what I prefer. I don't know why they said that latch is tighter.
And no, you cannot use both at the same time.

[steph]

I'm not really worried about the report, should I be?

First I have to say that Ryan isn't in an infant seat HOWEVER, if he was still in his Keyfit I wouldn't be running out to buy a new seat (the Discovery is another issue but I don't think I would have ever bought that seat anyway:) ).

Here is how I feel about it - it is only a matter of a month or two before CR comes out saying what is wrong with convertbles - I mean last year the Marathon was ranked horrible but a 3 n 1 was the top choice:confused:

Second, did you all see the crash test??? A bench (only a bench not a similated car with a front seat and back seat) was used. Plus the bench looked like it was made from those foam pads toddlers use to nap on at daycare - my car doesn't have seats like that - does anyones?

If you are going to test a carseat at least put it in a simulated car that is actually like real life (i.e. a back seat and front seat).

I'm not saying to totally disregard the CR - the Evenflo Discovery is an issue but we knew this before the reports came out.

However, saying seats flew of and went to the back of the seat....mmmm isn't that called cocooning??

I guess my point is that yes there are some issues and some things need to be addressed and re-tested to make sure they are safe but to go as far as to say that adults are safer in seat belts than infants in carseats is not a good comparision...so would they say infants are safer in seat belts than carseats...of course not.

I don't like that CR won't release their testing methods. In fact there is something inherently wrong with the idea that they can say a product is faulty and bad and cause widespread panic but not release how they test these products. I'm suprise Graco, Britax, Dorel, etc haven't gone to court over this....it seems that CR should have to release test results in order to publish results like this....JMHO though.

[Kellyr2]

I also feel that CR can't possibly be doing these tests in the name of safety for children or they'd gladly release the results at least to the manufacturers. You can't just say - "Hey, your products are unsafe and people shouldn't be buying them!" and expect the situation to improve. You have to say WHY and HOW they are unsafe and tell them how you did the tests. Because in any other scientific study, stats are taken seriously unless they can be replicated by a 3rd party. If they're somehow testing the seats differently, why not tell the manufacturers so that they can truly address these supposed issues!

I thought the same thing about what it said about the SS and the one other. It says it flew up and then slammed back down. Am I missing something? Is there some sensor in the test sled and some X amount of force in hitting the seatback and seat bottom upon rebound is too much and the SS went over that amount? That just sounds so subjective. Did the seat crack, did it come unbuckled/latched, did it pop off, did the harness fail, etc. WHAT happened to it when it hit the seat back and the seat bottom that made it fail the test? I would also be interested to know where the handle was in the test, actually.
I'm less concerned now that I think about the part where it says that it failed all 4 parts of the test. i was thinking of that as 4 different failures. But now I assume it's front with seatbelt, side with seatbelt, front with latch, side with latch. Which is why their report just says that it's not a safe install with either seatbelt or latch... but WHY? Ugh!! We need a spy at CR!

[Morganthe]

What does ISO stand for?

from http://www.maxi-cosi.com
scroll down and click on "News"
Description of Isofix system is near the bottom past their automatically locking restraint system on "Tobi" carseat and International Consumer testing.

IsoFix: a new method of installing a car seat in a car.
IsoFix stands for International Standard Organisation FIX.
IsoFix is a worldwide standardised attachment system for child car seats. The main advantage of IsoFix is that the system makes a rigid connection between the child car seat and the car. This offers extra strength and ensures that the child seat is not too loose which is the main problem with car seats that are fixed with a safety belt for adults. Moreover, with IsoFix the seat is much more easy to install than when a safety belt is used. The main advantage of IsoFix is that it minimises the likelihood of incorrect fitting.

Car seats have been developed to protect children during an accident. The real safety effect depends on the correct installation, irrespective of the quality of the car seat. All kinds of safety norms and regulations are used in the design of a car aimed at the adults sitting in it, but little or no attention is paid to the safety of children. The seat cushions, safety belts and anchor points are all aimed at the comfort and optimum protection of adults. However, all these systems are also used to attach safety equipment for children. Child car seats are also often fitted incorrectly as it is very difficult to fit them with safety belts for adults.

A list of the advantages of Maxi-Cosi IsoFix:

Simple to install

Excellent test results

Minimum chance of incorrect installation

You can see immediately whether the seat is fitted properly
Extra support leg for additional stability and safety


How does IsoFix work?
The idea behind Isofix is simple: With IsoFix you simply click the car seat into the two IsoFix anchor points in the car. The car should have the two IsoFix anchor points and also the car seat should be fitted with IsoFix co nnections. Both the Maxi-Cosi EasyFix and the Maxi-Cosi PrioriFix are fitted with IsoFix connections. The car seat should have a third attachment point to prevent the car seat from tipping forwards. The Maxi-Cosi products (EasyFix, EasyBase and PrioriFix) are fitted with a third attachment point, an extra 'leg' that rests on the car base and the height of which can be adjusted with a simple handle.

[Synchro246]

The Marathon and Boulevard are both very safe seats. Both have side impact protection, EPS foam, wide harnesses that don't twist, lots of good things. . .

Wendy


I thought that the marathon didn't have side-impact protection and the boulevard did.

I'm off to start a thread asking about EPS foam.

[steph]

They both have EPS foam the BLVD has added True Side impact Protection around the head area.

[granolamama]

granolamom, the britax companion does NOT have a tether.

Thanks, Kelly. I thought all of the Britax had RF tethers; I guess it's just the convertible models. Oops. :o

[j4m4d8]

Sigh.

OK, I did some research. There were approximately 4.1 million babies born in 2004. FARS recorded 120 crash deaths for children under 1 in 2004. They estimate that 80 of these were using a child restraint. NOPUS reports that 98 percent of children under 1 used a child restraint. So 40 of the estimated 82000 infants not in child seats died which is 48 deaths per 100000 children. 80 of the 4.0 million babies died which is 2 deaths per 100000 children. (The overall rate for passengers of all ages including motorcyclists is 14 to 15 per 100000.)

I feel like crying. Even if newer standards were developed, it is unlikely they would greatly reduce the fatality rates of infants. Yet how many parents won't use a seat for their infants because "the seats fail anyway, may as well hold them"? If only 94 percent of parents use infants seats it would wipe out the total potential lives saved by improving infant car seats.

I can't help but agree that CR cannot possibly care about children's safety. Is there a time to take a problem to the public so they can influence manufacturers and the government? Of course. But is this one of them? No, the possible good that could come out of it doesn't outweigh the bad that will come out of it. Further, they refuse to help anyone that could actually fix the problems.

You’d think that in a car crash, infants in their cozy car seats would be the most protected passengers of all. But you’d be wrong, our tests reveal.

This is a blatant lie. Infants are included in the favored group of passengers 9 and under that have radically lower fatality rates in vehicle crashes than all other ages. (3.1 per 100000 compared to 14.5 per 100000 overall) They are also included among the favored group of passengers under 5 that have the lowest injury rates of all. (300 per 100000 compared to 950 per 100000 overall) Consumer Reports has not presented any information in this article that refutes that fact. Infants ARE among the most protected passengers of all.

I don't think it's a bad premise that car seats should be able to withstand the same forces cars do. But it's important to remember that this wouldn't be improvement from a C seat to an A seat. Maybe more like from an A- to an A+. Maybe even from an A to an A+. Both from the aspect of overall passenger safety and from the aspect of reducing infant fatality and disability, this is not a high priority.

Sorry for my rambling vent. I'm just trying to think things through.

Julie D.

[CPSDarren]

Excellent comments. Thank you!

[LuvBug03]

ok someone else pointed this out in chat but I see it as well. CR's website shows a still of one evenflo infant seat seperating from the base, and a video of the other. These 2 arent the same seat, or not the same version????
One has that release handle that is like an open circle and the other doesnt, also the bases are different.

Can anyone tell which is which? I guess both evenflo seats failed then, but can they not label stuff right?

[emandbri]

ok someone else pointed this out in chat but I see it as well. CR's website shows a still of one evenflo infant seat seperating from the base, and a video of the other. These 2 arent the same seat, or not the same version????
One has that release handle that is like an open circle and the other doesnt, also the bases are different.

Can anyone tell which is which? I guess both evenflo seats failed then, but can they not label stuff right?

The one in the video is the disovery, I had one for my 7 year old. The one in the still shots must be the embrace. So now we know two of the 4 seats that flew off the base.

[emandbri]

I'm finding it very odd that they recomend the snugride with EPS foam when it looks like they didn't test any of the snugrides without the foam.

[Wineaux]

Hello!

First post here. My wife and I are expecting our first child on July 5th, and of course I am doing all the requisite research on car seats, strollers, and the like. I figure, get all my ducks in row before it gets too late, or I begin to freak out at the impending birth! :D

So, I viewed the Consumer Reports segment on the Early Show the other day with great interest. I had been lurking here and reading reviews and posts for a week or two before the segment aired, so I rushed here to see what the folks here had to say.

There were several things that struck me in the CR article that seemed to have been missed in the replies. Someone eluded to it, but never really took it head on. That is the fact that a Britax European model outperformed all the other car seats, including the US model Britax, which failed the test! I have included the link to the Euro car seat article below.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/babies-kids/child-car-booster-seats/car-seats-2-07/european-models/0207_seats_euro.htm

I have seen several people mention the fact that they tested the Graco SafeSeat with a 30lb dummy, and only used 22lb dummies for the other car seats. Yes they did. They tested the seats based upon the manufacturers maximum "claimed" weight for the seats.
We used a test dummy weighing the maximum claimed weight for each seat. That’s 30 pounds for the Graco SafeSeat and 22 pounds for the others.
Consumers will use their seats to the manufacturers maximum quite a lot of the time. I'm quite certain that many people purchased the Graco SafeSeat for the very reason that they could keep their child in that seat for a longer period of time, saving them money.

The crash test speeds were also mentioned. That they were higher than the NHTSA's standard tests. Sorry, but many accidents occur at higher speeds than that tested by the NHTSA. In fact, they test car seats at a lower speed than the cars they are traveling in! Um... Do the car seats have a breaking mechanism that slows them down in a crash to lower than the vehicle they are in? I think not.

From reading the article, and the companion European article, it is quite obvious that the NHTSA tests are not adequate. When a company, Britax, makes a car seat for the European market which is safer than the ones they sell here in the US, we should be paying close attention! The European crash safety standards are MUCH stricter than they are here in the US.

There is exactly ONE reason that a seat, or at the very least the technology of said seat, made for more exacting standards is not sold in the US. That reason is profit. The US is a self contained market, and if you do not have to add parts which will add to the manufacturing cost of an item, even if it is for added safety, then your profit margins are LARGER. That's it folks.

The pseudo excuse given by the Britax spokeswoman in the above linked article is particularly telling. "Britax spokeswoman Jeanna Rimmer says that nuances in the regulations and consumer preferences of different countries mean that manufacturers must create different car seats for different markets."

Consumer preferences? Are they insinuating that we "prefer" to have car seats which are less safe than the ones Britax manufactures for the European market? Of course not. It's this phrase that tells the rather obvious truth: "nuances in the regulations". The "nuance" in the regulations is that we have LESS strict regulations than they have in Europe, and so they can save money by not including the added safety features that are REQUIRED in Europe!

I don't work for CR, Britax, or any other company that makes or sells car seats. I am a VERY concerned new parent, and someone whom has always been a very vocal and forceful advocate for consumer rights. I personally do not let companies get away with jack when it comes to the products and services they sell. Put up, or shut up is my philosophy. I tend to make the companies I deal with "put up" on a regular basis. You know the old adage? "The squeaky wheel get the grease?" I'm that squeaky wheel...

So what car seat should I buy? Well, I am certainly looking at the top two performers, but the article I linked above has me thinking beyond that. I'm now looking at online companies selling the Britax Cosy Tot and the ISOFIX base. My mother travels to England on a regular basis, and I very well may have her buy us this car seat and an extra ISOFIX base for my car. I'll be contacting Britax to find our which of their US made car seats will fit on the ISOFIX base as well.

Has anyone here ever ordered a car seat from overseas? Has anyone used one of these European ISOFOX type bases that add in the rebound bar and the "foot" that attaches to the floorboard of your vehicle? Any help is of course greatly appreciated, and I will report back what I get from Britax regarding their ISOFIX base. I see that Graco also makes an ISOFOX base as well, and I'll be checking with them to see if their US seats are compatible with that base as well.

Sorry about the long first post, but this is MY first child we're talking about here, and I am not at all thrilled that our government is "compromising" my child's safety to help car seat manufacturers improve their bottom line and make their shareholders happier...

[CPSDarren]

Thank you for your comments. You make a lot of great points. It's too bad that Consumer Reports is not available to respond to issues regarding the hysteria they have created.

As for using a European seat, I would generally not recommend it. While it is true that their standards may be stricter in some areas, they may not be as strict in others. There are a large number of differences, and they are not as black and white as CR suggests. I would much rather see concerned parents buying convertible restraints and use them rear-facing, as these seats do not have the same issue of detaching from a base.

Our federal standards are in need of an update, especially for side impact testing of child restraints. Sadly, this is a slow process that has been going for many years and may take many more. Hopefully, Consumer Reports will speed up the process.

You may be interested to know that the discontinued Britax Baby Safe had a rigid ISOFIX base and a foot, very much like the European version (I believe the Cozy Tot and Baby Safe were nearly the same model). It was very expensive, however, and this may be part of the reason it was discontinued. Thus the comment about consumer preferences, perhaps- consumers in the USA did not recognize the benefits at the time and were not willing to spend the extra money.

[Wineaux]

You may be interested to know that the discontinued Britax Baby Safe had a rigid ISOFIX base and a foot, very much like the European version. It was very expensive, however, and this may be part of the reason it was discontinued. Thus the comment about consumer preferences, perhaps- consumers in the USA did not recognize the benefits at the time and were not willing to spend the extra money.
The added expense most certainly came from the fact that they were only making and selling one car seat with that base and feature. If it were required by law, and the manufacturers were required to put it on all of their car seats, then economies of scale would drastically lower the costs. Sure, there would be price increases for car seats, but there were price increases in cars when they added safety belts and air bags, and we don't question the increased safety and reduced loss of life from those added safety benefits now do we?

Remember, the automobile manufacturers fought tooth and nail to keep the government from requiring safety belts and air bags in our cars. They claimed it would cost too much and consumers wouldn't spend the money. Uh yeah... It just meant that their profit margins shrunk a bit. Not requiring side impact tests, and having lower crash test speeds than the cars that car seats are inside of is not a compromise that I want to see our government make. The NHTSA should be creating tests that are designed with the safety of our children in mind, and not the financial stability of the manufacturer.

In what areas are the European car seats less safe than those in the US? Which standards are less stringent? Is it strictly the way that the back seats are designed? Even if the European seats are not designed for LATCH, and the CR article is pretty clear that without using the LATCH system many of the car seats that failed would not have done so, wouldn't they attach correctly using a seat belt tether?

What can I say? I'm looking for both safety and guidance here. My wife wants a travel system, at least at the early stages so we can get our child in and out of the car, and onto a stroller, without waking them. That seems to call for a car seat with a base and matching stroller. After the first year or so, I am heavily leaning towards the new Sunshine Kids Radian80 that has the EPS foam and looks like it will stay with us until it's time for or child to stop using car seats at all. Any thoughts? Suggestions? :D

[CPSDarren]

The crash test speeds were also mentioned. That they were higher than the NHTSA's standard tests. Sorry, but many accidents occur at higher speeds than that tested by the NHTSA. In fact, they test car seats at a lower speed than the cars they are traveling in! Um... Do the car seats have a breaking mechanism that slows them down in a crash to lower than the vehicle they are in? I think not.


Consumer Reports doesn't give the whole story on this. From what I have found, the NHTSA side impact test for vehicles is done at a higher speed than over 95% of side impacts that occur in real crashes. It is true that many do happen at higher speeds, but it isn't very common.

Also, car seats do indeed have a braking mechanism of a sort. The whole point of securing a car seat to a vehicle is to give the child seat the advantage of the vehicle's crushing frame to ride down the crash. I have been told by crash testing experts that a 30 mph side impact to a typical vehicle would be the rough equivalent of 14-18mph if the a child seat was tested on a laboratory sled. That's not to say that testing at a higher speed isn't valid, but it would be at a significantly higher energy than the overwhelming majority of real world crashes.

We can certainly ask for our child seats to be safer at these higher speeds, but I would also expect that there would be a much higher cost involved. The question ultimately becomes how safe is needed? At what point are the returns so diminishing that we aren't saving many more lives? Keep in mind that as prices increase, more people are likely not to buy these new seats and their children are more likely to be unrestrained or inadequately restrained in older, used seats. I don't have a good answer for this.

[CPSDarren]

The added expense most certainly came from the fact that they were only making and selling one car seat with that base and feature. If it were required by law, and the manufacturers were required to put it on all of their car seats, then economies of scale would drastically lower the costs. Sure, there would be price increases for car seats, but there were price increases in cars when they added safety belts and air bags, and we don't question the increased safety and reduced loss of life from those added safety benefits now do we?


There are many people who still feel features like ABS, airbags and stability control are not saving lives and only adding more cost. I'm not one of them, but there certainly would be questions if the cost of infant seats rose significantly, even with economies of scale. Many wouldn't question, they simply wouldn't be able to afford one. That's the case even today. The support we've had in our organization for providing or subsidizing child seats has all but disappeared and many low income parents struggle to buy used seats made many years ago. These parents also drive cars from 10 or more years ago that lack all these advanced safety features, because new cars are priced out of their range.



Remember, the automobile manufacturers fought tooth and nail to keep the government from requiring safety belts and air bags in our cars. They claimed it would cost too much and consumers wouldn't spend the money. Uh yeah... It just meant that their profit margins shrunk a bit. Not requiring side impact tests, and having lower crash test speeds than the cars that car seats are inside of is not a compromise that I want to see our government make. The NHTSA should be creating tests that are designed with the safety of our children in mind, and not the financial stability of the manufacturer.


The NHTSA does need updated standards. They will happen in time, maybe sooner if concerned voters start complaining to their political appointees.



In what areas are the European car seats less safe than those in the US? Which standards are less stringent? Is it strictly the way that the back seats are designed? Even if the European seats are not designed for LATCH, and the CR article is pretty clear that without using the LATCH system many of the car seats that failed would not have done so, wouldn't they attach correctly using a seat belt tether?

As for the differences in standards, I am not familiar with the fine details. I know the bench itself varies considerably, as do the requirements for using lap-only belts and shoulder belts. I have been told in the past by crash testing experts that the US standards do make it more difficult to pass some measures, even at lower speeds. Of course, for side impacts, there is no US standard, so that is a very major omission.



What can I say? I'm looking for both safety and guidance here. My wife wants a travel system, at least at the early stages so we can get our child in and out of the car, and onto a stroller, without waking them. That seems to call for a car seat with a base and matching stroller. After the first year or so, I am heavily leaning towards the new Sunshine Kids Radian80 that has the EPS foam and looks like it will stay with us until it's time for or child to stop using car seats at all. Any thoughts? Suggestions?


Consumer Reports has some very good points, to be sure. Even so, they don't tell the whole story, don't share any of their methods and aren't available to answer questions from concerned parents or child passenger safety experts. As for options, you said it best about preferences. If a convertible seat does not have the major flaw (detachable carrier) that many infant seats do in the USA, that difference in safety may be a preference over being able to move the baby in a carrier or being able to match a stroller. My favorite infant seat was the Baby Trend LATCH Loc. It's similar to the Flex Loc, but has rigid LATCH attachments. Sadly, Consumer Reports neglected to test it in the most recent review. It had been difficult to find due to an exclusive deal with Babies R Us, but it sounds like it may now be coming to other stores like Target. You may also be lucky enough to find a Britax Baby Safe. In that it is nearly identical to the Cozy Tot praised by Consumer Reports, you'd essentially have a model that should pass both USA and European standards (though perhaps not officially). I note that the Cosy Tot sells for about £90 at online retail stores in Great Britain. The base is optional and also sells for about £90. Even on sale or Ebay, that's in the range of the $299 the Baby Safe sold for in the USA. Consumer Reports conveniently failed to mention that, too.

[Wineaux]

Consumer Reports doesn't give the whole story on this. From what I have found, the NHTSA side impact test for vehicles is done at a higher speed than over 95% of side impacts that occur in real crashes. It is true that many do happen at higher speeds, but it isn't very common.

Also, car seats do indeed have a braking mechanism of a sort. The whole point of securing a car seat to a vehicle is to give the child seat the advantage of the vehicle's crushing frame to ride down the crash. I have been told by crash testing experts that a 30 mph side impact to a typical vehicle would be the rough equivalent of 14-18mph if the a child seat was tested on a laboratory sled. That's not to say that testing at a higher speed isn't valid, but it would be at a significantly higher energy than the overwhelming majority of real world crashes.

We can certainly ask for our child seats to be safer at these higher speeds, but I would also expect that there would be a much higher cost involved. The question ultimately becomes how safe is needed? At what point are the returns so diminishing that we aren't saving many more lives? Keep in mind that as prices increase, more people are likely not to buy these new seats and their children are more likely to be unrestrained or inadequately restrained in older, used seats. I don't have a good answer for this.
Ah ha! Very informative, and you are quite correct, I didn't take into consideration the fact that car seat would be riding down the impact. That pesky ole physics at work again! :o

I will point out that the whole "costs" issue is one that manufacturers have continuously brought up as the great bugaboo of safety testing, and have so far, been proven wrong every time. I firmly believe that side impact testing is long overdue, and should be implemented immediately. Sooner rather than later in this case.

PS... I have been doing some searching on the site but have not yet found an answer to this question. How does one become a Certified CPS Tech? What is involved, etc? It's something I would love to become involved in. Feel free to PM me the answer, or start a new thread so this one doesn't get too derailed.
;)

[CPSDarren]

I will point out that the whole "costs" issue is one that manufacturers have continuously brought up as the great bugaboo of safety testing, and have so far, been proven wrong every time. I firmly believe that side impact testing is long overdue, and should be implemented immediately. Sooner rather than later in this case.

I completely agree. I also understand that with all the regulations and testing and potential liability, the margins on child seats are not like those on autos and many other products. They do need to be very safe, but the issue is at what point does additional safety for the most severe (and also relatively rare) crashes outweigh the increases in price for those that already can't afford a new child seat. I don't have that answer.

PS... I have been doing some searching on the site but have not yet found an answer to this question. How does one become a Certified CPS Tech? What is involved, etc? It's something I would love to become involved in. Feel free to PM me the answer, or start a new thread so this one doesn't get too derailed.
;)

These websites are a great place to start for information on certification:

http://www.safekids.org/certification/

http://www.cpsboard.org

[Alicia-N-2SafeBugs]

I go out of town for a couple days and look what I miss!

This is just my observations and reitterating what others have said...

The test footage of the Britax Companion where it "jumps off the seat and slams back down again"...isn't that what it's supposed to do!? That's just how infant seats perform..right?

That bench seat looks awfully wierd...like it was made from the kind of foam and plastic you find McDonald's playground floors made out of. What is with there being no front seat? In a real life crash, there is going to be a front seat there and prevent some movement.

In the MSNBC video, I was rolling my eyes at the footage of the person trying to install the Eddie Bauer base...no matter what base they were trying to install it would not have worked since the seatbelt wasn't locked. :rolleyes:

CR didn't do this report to protect children. They did this report to make money as is evident by their refusing to disclose crash testing methods, etc. I don't buy it.

[CPSDarren]

Even in the USA crash tests, there is no front seat. Experts debate whether the seat would prevent any movement. In a real crash, the front seat is probably moving forward just as the child seat behind it is. As you said, rebound is a normal result of a crash with a rear-facing seat. Without an anti-rebound system, that will certainly happen. The Companion does have a rebound bar, I'm not sure what aspect of the test resulted in the bounce CR found objectionable. It's another mystery of CR's methods. It's also not clear if preventing rebound is any significant reduction in risk for serious injuries or fatalities. It's probably a good thing, but because rear-facing seats are inherently very safe, the improvement may not be as significant as CR implies.

It's not clear how CR conducted their tests or how they evaluated their injury measures. What is certain is that rear-facing seats in the USA have a very low incidence of fatalities compared to other modes of travel and most of those statistics are from much older models.

[lodonal65]

Even in the USA crash tests, there is no front seat. Experts debate whether the seat would prevent any movement. In a real crash, the front seat is probably moving forward just as the child seat behind it is. As you said, rebound is a normal result of a crash with a rear-facing seat. Without an anti-rebound system, that will certainly happen. The Companion does have a rebound bar, I'm not sure what aspect of the test resulted in the bounce CR found objectionable. It's another mystery of CR's methods. It's also not clear if preventing rebound is any significant reduction in risk for serious injuries or fatalities. It's probably a good thing, but because rear-facing seats are inherently very safe, the improvement may not be as significant as CR implies.

It's not clear how CR conducted their tests or how they evaluated their injury measures. What is certain is that rear-facing seats in the USA have a very low incidence of fatalities compared to other modes of travel and most of those statistics are from much older models.


This why I questioned a few months ago- why the IIHS doesn't do some child restraint crash tests in REAL vehicles.
Maybe then we would be able to see exactly how well they perform.
I have a question too about CR testing. Do they use the computerized dummies like the IIHS do to show what kinds of crash forces are exerted on the dummies bodies?

[CPSDarren]

Unfortunately, I can't answer about CR testing. They don't tell anyone, so no one knows. Even some crash testing experts are baffled by some of their inconsistencies, based on emails I've received.

As for the IIHS, it may have to do with money. Their main effort is with vehicles. Child restraints already protect their passengers very well, perhaps there isn't a lot to be gained by insurance companies compared to the money spent? I really have no idea. On the other hand, I DO think the NHTSA should be doing this. We spend billions on a bird flu threat that isn't even real yet. If we spent that much more on this real and present epidemic of child fatalities in motor vehicles crashes, we could expect a lot more from the NHTSA. Of course, they'd also have to have the mindset to make changes in an expedient manner and not be slowed down my manufacturer lobbying.

[UlrikeDG]

The pseudo excuse given by the Britax spokeswoman in the above linked article is particularly telling. "Britax spokeswoman Jeanna Rimmer says that nuances in the regulations and consumer preferences of different countries mean that manufacturers must create different car seats for different markets."

Consumer preferences? Are they insinuating that we "prefer" to have car seats which are less safe than the ones Britax manufactures for the European market?

Well, having lived in Europe, I can tell you some of the differences I noticed. One is that European seats don't have chest clips. If you're using a seat properly, a chest clip is unnecessary. It's sole purpose is to hold the straps in place when the harness isn't adjusted as tight as it should be. But, US seats have them, so we have to use them according to manufacturer instruction. Parents in the US expect a chest clip. Fisher Price released a seat without a chest clip once, and parents were outraged by the lack of this "safety feature."

Infant seats with a stay-in-the-car bases were also rare. Here, they're the norm. Most, if not all, European infant seats are designed to be installed with the shoulder belt wrapping around the seatback, which helps to limit downward rotation. Those seats may not even fit in US vehicles.

In most of Europe, infant seats have rear facing weight limits of 10-13 kg (22-28.6 lb), and convertible seats are unusual.

In the US, vehicles must have self locking belts. In Europe, seats must have a built in locking mechanism for the belt (like Britax's lock-offs).

Certainly money comes in to play. Probably a lot more than any of us would like to admit. But, don't downplay the differences in culture across the ocean. Consumer expectations are extremely different.

[starlightCPST]

Did anybody see Graco's response?

"As parents ourselves, we at Graco® are committed to producing high-quality products that help keep children safe. All Graco car seats, including the Graco SnugRide® and Infant SafeSeat™, meet or exceed all applicable government standards.

We believe that the standard of safety for child restraints lies with the stringent regulations established over time by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), supported by rigorous industry testing and analysis. Graco will continue to work closely with NHTSA as such regulations continue to evolve.

If you have questions or comments regarding your Graco car seat, please contact our customer service line at (800) 345-4109."

[sueballoon]

New here, have to say we did buy a Britax Baby Safe in 2005 for our latest addition to the family. Looks exactly like the cozy tot. Loved the stabilizing foot, seat was rock solid. Just moved it out today, replaced by a Boulevard. After a little over one year of use the harness was getting a little too snug over winter-wear.

After 6 years of Britax seats, I didn't think they could do much more to improve on the safety of the seat - that foot really changed my mind about that. Too bad more consumers weren't going for that option, if the demand was there maybe more manufacturers would start using it.

[CPSDarren]

Welcome!

Maybe you can play on the fears generated by Consumer Reports and get your money back (or more) for the Baby Safe on ebay ;-) The Baby Safe really was ahead of its time.

[skaterbabscpst]

The Baby Safe was a nice seat - as was it's predecessor the Handle With Care. (I had a HWC and LOVED it! it fit my then-TINY daughter far better than our SnugRide and took up less space in the car.)

That said, you mentioned using winter wear in it - you should NEVER use heavy clothing/coats in the car. If you have to loosen the harness for it, it is too bulky to use and can cause your child to be ejected.

[momika]

Hello!

First post here. My wife and I are expecting our first child on July 5th, and of course I am doing all the requisite research on car seats, strollers, and the like. I figure, get all my ducks in row before it gets too late, or I begin to freak out at the impending birth! :D

So, I viewed the Consumer Reports segment on the Early Show the other day with great interest. I had been lurking here and reading reviews and posts for a week or two before the segment aired, so I rushed here to see what the folks here had to say.

There were several things that struck me in the CR article that seemed to have been missed in the replies. Someone eluded to it, but never really took it head on. That is the fact that a Britax European model outperformed all the other car seats, including the US model Britax, which failed the test! I have included the link to the Euro car seat article below.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/babies-kids/child-car-booster-seats/car-seats-2-07/european-models/0207_seats_euro.htm

I have seen several people mention the fact that they tested the Graco SafeSeat with a 30lb dummy, and only used 22lb dummies for the other car seats. Yes they did. They tested the seats based upon the manufacturers maximum "claimed" weight for the seats.

Consumers will use their seats to the manufacturers maximum quite a lot of the time. I'm quite certain that many people purchased the Graco SafeSeat for the very reason that they could keep their child in that seat for a longer period of time, saving them money.

The crash test speeds were also mentioned. That they were higher than the NHTSA's standard tests. Sorry, but many accidents occur at higher speeds than that tested by the NHTSA. In fact, they test car seats at a lower speed than the cars they are traveling in! Um... Do the car seats have a breaking mechanism that slows them down in a crash to lower than the vehicle they are in? I think not.

From reading the article, and the companion European article, it is quite obvious that the NHTSA tests are not adequate. When a company, Britax, makes a car seat for the European market which is safer than the ones they sell here in the US, we should be paying close attention! The European crash safety standards are MUCH stricter than they are here in the US.

There is exactly ONE reason that a seat, or at the very least the technology of said seat, made for more exacting standards is not sold in the US. That reason is profit. The US is a self contained market, and if you do not have to add parts which will add to the manufacturing cost of an item, even if it is for added safety, then your profit margins are LARGER. That's it folks.

The pseudo excuse given by the Britax spokeswoman in the above linked article is particularly telling. "Britax spokeswoman Jeanna Rimmer says that nuances in the regulations and consumer preferences of different countries mean that manufacturers must create different car seats for different markets."

Consumer preferences? Are they insinuating that we "prefer" to have car seats which are less safe than the ones Britax manufactures for the European market? Of course not. It's this phrase that tells the rather obvious truth: "nuances in the regulations". The "nuance" in the regulations is that we have LESS strict regulations than they have in Europe, and so they can save money by not including the added safety features that are REQUIRED in Europe!

I don't work for CR, Britax, or any other company that makes or sells car seats. I am a VERY concerned new parent, and someone whom has always been a very vocal and forceful advocate for consumer rights. I personally do not let companies get away with jack when it comes to the products and services they sell. Put up, or shut up is my philosophy. I tend to make the companies I deal with "put up" on a regular basis. You know the old adage? "The squeaky wheel get the grease?" I'm that squeaky wheel...

So what car seat should I buy? Well, I am certainly looking at the top two performers, but the article I linked above has me thinking beyond that. I'm now looking at online companies selling the Britax Cosy Tot and the ISOFIX base. My mother travels to England on a regular basis, and I very well may have her buy us this car seat and an extra ISOFIX base for my car. I'll be contacting Britax to find our which of their US made car seats will fit on the ISOFIX base as well.

Has anyone here ever ordered a car seat from overseas? Has anyone used one of these European ISOFOX type bases that add in the rebound bar and the "foot" that attaches to the floorboard of your vehicle? Any help is of course greatly appreciated, and I will report back what I get from Britax regarding their ISOFIX base. I see that Graco also makes an ISOFOX base as well, and I'll be checking with them to see if their US seats are compatible with that base as well.

Sorry about the long first post, but this is MY first child we're talking about here, and I am not at all thrilled that our government is "compromising" my child's safety to help car seat manufacturers improve their bottom line and make their shareholders happier...

it IS against the law to get that European car seat to use here in the US.

The US law reads:

A person may not manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, introduce or deliver for introduction into interstate commerce, or import into the United States, any motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment....unless the vehicle or equipment complies with the standard...Title 49 Section 30112 of the US Code of Law

Child seats are items of motor vehicle equipment. The fine is up to $1000 per violation. Federal Law does not address USE so consumers can technically use a non-US certified child seat, but when they brought it in (importation) they broke the law. However, US State Laws prohibit the USE of non-US child seats. US Customs has the right to seize non-complying child seats. Visitors/tourists are given special consideration. (A child seat in US law is one designed for children up to 50 pounds.)

Buying a non-US child seat and bringing it in risks US Customs seizure and fines. Bringing a US seat into Canada is also technically illegal in Canada...visitors get special consideration.

Flights originating in the US require child seats to be certified to US regulations and have the statement on the label in red "approved for aircraft." Europeans going back from the US are unhappy to find that their European infant seat can't be used on board for the return trip...it was ok to get here though.

European (ECE...European Economic Community) and US and Canadian and Australian regulations are different. The myth that ECE, Australian, or Canadian requirements are tougher is false. Some aspects of requirements and testing are tougher or easier in each respective country. For example:

- US requires dynamic (crash) testing with a lap belt only for infant and toddler seats...tougher than anywhere else in the world.

Nearly every infant child seat sold in Europe meeting ECE requirements will FAIL the US test because the seat shells are too weak and will fracture. There are very few exceptions. The US test assumes the worst case scenario...lap belt only, the ECE allows the shoulder belt to be looped around the back of the infant seat for support. Europe had lap-shoulder belts in the outboard rear of cars since 1973...the US since 1989...lots of US vehicles in service with all lap belts in the rear.

Without modification nearly every ECE toddler seat (forward-facing) will FAIL the US test because the head will move too far. The ECE allows the shoulder belt to be used with some form of lock off. - - Locking clips do not exist in Europe.

- Chest clips (harness clips) are not legal in the ECE...require only one latch for release...theoretically emergency release is faster.

- The US crash test pulse is different that the ECE crash pulse and Australian. The ECE pulse is easier than US for some products but the reverse is also true..they are just different.

- Canada uses the US pulse but with a non-moving seatback...US seatback moves...can't predict which is tougher because some models react differently in each test.

- ECE requires impact padding around head...US, Canada require none.

- ECE requires puzzle buckles...must put 2 tongue pieces together then latch. US, Canada, Australia don't.