Pics of the Trufit with anti-rebound foot

[An Aurora]

I still think it is fuggly looking.

ITA. I still might get one, but it's definitely fugly.

 

[CrabbyBunchX3]

Ooo I like it. Hopefully, DD will get one they come out.

 

[snowbird25ca]

Wow, thanks for the pic's. I really like that cover - it looks very soft.

If the ant-rebound foot one comes to Canada while ds is still well under the weight limit, I'll buy one in a heartbeat.

And can I just say how much I love that they have a newborn and a toddler area in the recline indicator.

 

[April]

Wow, COOOOLLLL!!!! Now I definitely need to get pregnant. Maybe I'll get Allport to let me know when it's on its way to Canada so we can start TTC.

 

[Jeanum]

HIC = head injury criterion

 

[Synchro246]

Ok, anyone want to link me to an explaination of HIC?


I think the trufit is cute. Jordan is too

 

[Jeanum]

It's a measure of head acceleration over a function of time. There's an uber technical explanation of HIC at
http://www.mchenrysoftware.com/HIC and the ATB.htm

 

[horseymom]

ok, I feel stupid asking this but what is it for? what does it do? I have a TF and can imagine loving it any more LOL

 

[ame0312]

the anti-rebound bar?
it keeps the seat from rebounding towards the vehicle seat... kinda like a rear facing tether on britax & radian...

 

[Wineaux]

And... it will keep the water, snow, mud and dirt off the back of your vehicle seat!

 

[sunnymw]

And... it will keep the water, snow, mud and dirt off the back of your vehicle seat!

And peanut butter...

 

[minismom]

Can anyone elaborate on the differences between the anti rebound bar and the RF tether? I'm thinking in both frontal and side impact crashes. I remember reading that the makers of the TF were very against the RF tether, I guess they wanted the seat to move up a little. I can see how with the bar the seat will move with the child to a certain point then stop. Can anyone explain please?

 

[canadiangie]

Can anyone elaborate on the differences between the anti rebound bar and the RF tether? I'm thinking in both frontal and side impact crashes. I remember reading that the makers of the TF were very against the RF tether, I guess they wanted the seat to move up a little. I can see how with the bar the seat will move with the child to a certain point then stop. Can anyone explain please?

It's interesting isn't it?

We can guess lots of things here...


We can guess that the manufacturer doesn't approve of creating an anchor point (ie: including a D-ring for rf tethering).

We can guess it was a cost issue.

We can guess it was feedback from parents wanting an anti-rebound feature.

We can guess this was all part of the plan... you know, let's keep the sales going on a new seat, that now has an even newer feature.

For all we know, they just wanted to be different. The first North American mainstream car seat manufacturer to offer an anti-rebound bar on a convertible (as opposed to allowing for rf tethering).

Who knows.

But you're right, it is sort of odd.


The thing about an anti-rebound bar vs. a rf tether is that they do sort of work differently. Well, maybe not work differently, but the end result is slightly different. The rf tether allowing for less give, the foot allowing for slightly more. In the end, the use of an anti-rebond bar is going to provide more ride-down for the child, which is a good thing.


I so want to know what the story is though. When I read in the current manual that a "rf seat should never be tethered" (ie: the seat should be allowed to cocoon/rebound.. which lends itself to manufacturer philosophy on the subject), and a few weeks later saw the ABC thread with the news about the foot, I almost choked.

 

[snowbird25ca]

We can guess that the manufacturer doesn't approve of creating an anchor point (ie: including a D-ring for rf tethering).

This is the entire reason that Recaro doesn't allow their convertibles to be tethered rf'ing. They don't want there to be a created anchor point - they have concerns about compromising vehicle integrity - so maybe this influenced The First Years too?

The thing about an anti-rebound bar vs. a rf tether is that they do sort of work differently. Well, maybe not work differently, but the end result is slightly different. The rf tether allowing for less give, the foot allowing for slightly more. In the end, the use of an anti-rebond bar is going to provide more ride-down for the child, which is a good thing.


I so want to know what the story is though. When I read in the current manual that a "rf seat should never be tethered" (ie: the seat should be allowed to cocoon/rebound.. which lends itself to manufacturer philosophy on the subject), and a few weeks later saw the ABC thread with the news about the foot, I almost choked.

Yeah, I have to wonder if that comment is there to reassure the parents who would otherwise try and tether the seat anyways because they think the movement is bad?

It could also be that if it was tethered rf'ing, the neck loads would be higher than they want to see - maybe they tested it that way and just weren't happy with it? So they moved to plan B which involved a re-design of the seat with the ARF?

Maybe it was in the plan all along and it just wasn't ready for release until now? Or maybe it was consumer demand like you said.

Who knows... What I do know is that I'm 100% comfortable with the ARF, but not fully comfortable using a rf'ing tether with a created anchor point. Give me a dedicated anchor point that was sanctioned and I'd use it, but that discussion with Allport really made me do some thinking and I'm not sure I would rf tether my own seats anymore without more data. We still haven't heard from Britax if they did any testing in vehicles, and if so, how many... If I knew that, I would find it much easier to make a decision for myself should the need arise... Because the Radian is useless rf'ing in my truck due to insufficient recline without the rf'ing tether, so I'd have no choice but to tether it rf'ing if I wanted to use it that way...

 

[Synchro246]

Who knows... What I do know is that I'm 100% comfortable with the ARF, but not fully comfortable using a rf'ing tether with a created anchor point. Give me a dedicated anchor point that was sanctioned and I'd use it, but that discussion with Allport really made me do some thinking and I'm not sure I would rf tether my own seats anymore without more data...

You summed up how I feel, I think, and I didn't even have a chance to think it aloud yet. This might be why I finally gave up the idea of getting a Marathon in favor of the TF(should the need arise).
Who's Allport?

 

[LISmama810]

The thing about an anti-rebound bar vs. a rf tether is that they do sort of work differently. Well, maybe not work differently, but the end result is slightly different. The rf tether allowing for less give, the foot allowing for slightly more. In the end, the use of an anti-rebond bar is going to provide more ride-down for the child, which is a good thing.

It could also be that if it was tethered rf'ing, the neck loads would be higher than they want to see - maybe they tested it that way and just weren't happy with it? So they moved to plan B which involved a re-design of the seat with the ARF?

Those were pretty much my thoughts on it. I'm fine with a RF tether for older kids, but I worry about neck loads in younger babies. If the anti-rebound foot decreases the neck loads, I'm all for it. Now, do we know if that's actually the case? It seems like it would be...

 

[Kat_Momof3]

yes, basically the foot gives all the benefits the tether would, but without the risks for younger kids along with not having a part be so difficult to figure out (just think of how many people don't tether or tether wrong with rf Britax seats because it isn't that easy or clear cut unless you are familiar with it)

 

[crunchierthanthou]

yes, basically the foot gives all the benefits the tether would, but without the risks for younger kids along with not having a part be so difficult to figure out (just think of how many people don't tether or tether wrong with rf Britax seats because it isn't that easy or clear cut unless you are familiar with it)

I disagree. According to a study by the U of Va, the main benefit of the rf tether is in side impacts, which we know are the most dangerous types of crashes. The additional neck loading in front impacts with a tethered seat is well within accepted limits and FTMP is balanced by slight improvement in safety in that type of crash.

IMO, the rf tether really doesn’t matter when it comes to front or rear impacts. Sure, intuitively you don’t want to see the kid’s head smack into the back of the seat (or glass), but there’s not much in the way of hard data to back that up. It’s mostly a theoretical concern and we know that seats that rebound/cocoon are safe too.

I do see the ARF as a good thing- as anything that is absorbing crash forces would be. But is it really addressing a true safety concern? It prevents rebound with less neck strain than Swedish style tethering and that’s good. However, the data shows that the neck loading in a tethered seat really isn’t much of a danger (nor is the rebounding that it's preventing). However, using a tether improves performance in the more dangerous side impacts, for which I can't see the ARF doing a whole lot. :shrug-shoulders:

 

[snowbird25ca]

Those were pretty much my thoughts on it. I'm fine with a RF tether for older kids, but I worry about neck loads in younger babies. If the anti-rebound foot decreases the neck loads, I'm all for it. Now, do we know if that's actually the case? It seems like it would be...

On a side note, the rep said that the HIC on the Truefit with the rebound bar is under 400. (1000 is the max, Britax MA with rfing tether is around 700)

That's a pretty significant decrease in neck loads.

And LISmama - I'm in complete agreement with rf tethering young babies. I actually outright recommend against rf tethering until a minimum of 4 months when a parent is going with a seat that is can be tethered rf'ing from birth and is likely to fit a newborn. :thumbsup:


Somebody asked who Allport is - Allport is a member on the board who posts on the CDN forum. She's a CRST-I instructor and works with TC playing a role in the compliance division. It's part of how TC is getting defect investigations open so quickly lately. I'll tell you one thing though, it's awesome to have that resource from somebody who knows the rules and regulations relating to CMVSS intimately.

 

[minismom]

I disagree. According to a study by the U of Va, the main benefit of the rf tether is in side impacts, which we know are the most dangerous types of crashes. The additional neck loading in front impacts with a tethered seat is well within accepted limits and FTMP is balanced by slight improvement in safety in that type of crash.

IMO, the rf tether really doesn’t matter when it comes to front or rear impacts. Sure, intuitively you don’t want to see the kid’s head smack into the back of the seat (or glass), but there’s not much in the way of hard data to back that up. It’s mostly a theoretical concern and we know that seats that rebound/cocoon are safe too.

I do see the ARF as a good thing- as anything that is absorbing crash forces would be. But is it really addressing a true safety concern? It prevents rebound with less neck strain than Swedish style tethering and that’s good. However, the data shows that the neck loading in a tethered seat really isn’t much of a danger (nor is the rebounding that it's preventing). However, using a tether improves performance in the more dangerous side impacts, for which I can't see the ARF doing a whole lot. :shrug-shoulders:

Crunchy, you make really good points. Initially I was thinking how great the ARB is cause it does away with the neck load issue and still prevents cocooning all the way, but I totally forgot about side impact. That really is why I like the RF tether. The crash test NHTSA released of a safe seat performing well on side impact freaked me out. The seat did what it was supposed to do, but it totally went over to the side. Don't know how nice that would be if it was smashing against a window or for a person sitting next to it... Now for a newborn I wouldnt use the RF tether, and I guess the ARB is at least better than nothing...