In response to Transport Canada's crash test footage and summaries

lynsgirl said:

I have a just-turning-3yo the same size and he is currently RF in his MA. IF he were to need to be FF, I would still be absolutely ok with that. The failure(s) happened in specific vehicles with ATDs that were ~51lbs. For now, until we learn more, I would feel just fine with a 32lb child in a FF MA in a Honda Odyssey. The Odyssey is *not* the same vehicle as a Civic, whether it's made by Honda or not. The crash effects of a heavy minivan are going to be different from a small car. There has been a lot of theorizing as to why the Civic, which has such stellar ratings for front-seat passengers, would have such abysmal problems in the back seat. I think Tam posted about that in the other thread. For the Tacoma, the Radian was tested FF in the backseat and had a spectacularly not good result (disclaimer - not saying this is a bad seat or a bad vehicle or that it *would* happen to you. Just making mention of that fact). Do you have bucket seats in the front of your Tacoma? Is there a bench in the extended cab or two separate seats? Sorry for asking obvious questions - I'm not terribly familiar with that vehicle. If there is the option of putting her seat in the center rear (if you have bucket seats), I'd try for that and I wouldn't have a problem using the MA. If you can't use it in the center, could you put the front seat as far forward as possible? (again, assuming bucket seats).

OK, wait - you are saying "crew cab," but also saying there is "no room." Is it a true crew cab (4 full doors) or an extended cab? If it's a true crew cab, that changes some things.

Click to expand...

Was there a pattern of failures with various restraints in certain vehicles? I didn't observe this, but I did notice that certain restraints failed in several vehicles. I wasn't searching for any patterns in particular, nor did I watch all of the videos. The way the site is set up, it's easier to find the same restraint in different vehicles than it is to find different restraints in the same vehicle.

[Divulging any actual or perceivable biases: I drive a 2002 Civic, own 2 Radians, and I am not a Britax fan.] I saw two videos of the Marathon failing in a Civic. Why is the Civic (or combo of Civic+Marathon) being blamed for this? The Marathon had similar performance in at least two other vehicles, and the Civic performed well with other restraints. I didn't see any other restraint fail so spectacularly in the Civic (again, I didn't watch them all). I think that shows that it's not entirely the Civic's problem, it's either the Marathon (which was being tested beyond government requirements) or the combination of Marathon and Civic.

As far as the extended cab Tacoma test with the Radian goes, I'm as confident as I can be that you would see similar results with any forward facing child restraint (without running every possible CR of course). There just isn't room. Many extended cab trucks do not allow CR installation in the back seat for this very reason, and also some CRs do not allow installation in extended cab trucks.

pixels99 said:

Was there a pattern of failures with various restraints in certain vehicles? I didn't observe this, but I did notice that certain restraints failed in several vehicles. I wasn't searching for any patterns in particular, nor did I watch all of the videos. The way the site is set up, it's easier to find the same restraint in different vehicles than it is to find different restraints in the same vehicle.

[Divulging any actual or perceivable biases: I drive a 2002 Civic, own 2 Radians, and I am not a Britax fan.] I saw two videos of the Marathon failing in a Civic. Why is the Civic (or combo of Civic+Marathon) being blamed for this? The Marathon had similar performance in at least two other vehicles, and the Civic performed well with other restraints. I didn't see any other restraint fail so spectacularly in the Civic (again, I didn't watch them all). I think that shows that it's not entirely the Civic's problem, it's either the Marathon (which was being tested beyond government requirements) or the combination of Marathon and Civic.

As far as the extended cab Tacoma test with the Radian goes, I'm as confident as I can be that you would see similar results with any forward facing child restraint (without running every possible CR of course). There just isn't room. Many extended cab trucks do not allow CR installation in the back seat for this very reason, and also some CRs do not allow installation in extended cab trucks.

Click to expand...

I am not blaming the Civic. Just mentioning different theories that are being discussed. Not letting the MA off the hook for this - just discussing, since we do not know what variables caused this to happen. I also was *not* blaming the Radian OR the Tacoma for anything, just making mention of the crash test that we saw. I agree that in an extended cab truck, any seat is going to have issues w/the lack of HE room. It was just a surprising result for a low-profile seat that generally has excellent numbers, that's all.


I'd like to mention again (not to you specifically, just in general) that we aren't seeing these failures IRL. The MA has been on the US market for 7+ yrs and we've heard nothing about the harness ripping through the shell in real world crashes. I truly believe we *would* hear something if it happened, because the Britax name is well-known for safety and a failure that spectacular would make news.

bubbaray said:

The Tacoma pictured in the videos is older than the one we have -- we have a brand new 2009 (got it just before the 2010s came out in June). It is a full crew cab with 4 "real" doors and large back seat. Airbags all around, etc. 5* safety rating (which is the main reason DH got it -- the other truck in the running was the Silverado/Sierra, which had poor crash test ratings).

While in theory it is possible to put a seat center, we can't b/c we can't get a good puzzle with DD#1's Nautilus. Both seats are outboard, installed via LATCH (both children are under 48lbs, which is Toyota's LATCH limit). THe seats are somewhat angled upwards at the front end, which makes installs a PITA. The MA was particularly hard due to the base. I haven't tried a RN in there.

There definitely isn't a lot of room at all between the child restraint and the front seats. The front seats are bucket, but both DH and I are tall and need to have the seats all the way back to fit.

I'm very concerned about the truck. A new truck is NOT an option -- it IS a new truck and was purchased specifically due to its high crash test ratings. DH will drive it till it drops -- his previously Pathfinder was nearly 14yrs old. I have to find a way to make these restraints safer if possible.

The issue isn't as huge a deal in my van as there is a decent amount of room between the restraints and the front seats. Still, I'm NOT happy when I watch those videos. Not at all.
TIA.

Click to expand...

If it's a newer vehicle *and* a true crew cab, I wouldn't have a problem with either seat. And probably a Radian *would* perform better in a limited HE room scenario.

I don't think anyone is happy about seeing the results of some of these videos, but until we know more about what actually caused any of these failures (in which the injury levels were still minimal. Not that we want our kids injured, but it does give me a smidge of reassurance that despite a horrific failure, the injury level was minimal), it's all of us speculating and transferring what we've seen and speculated about to different vehicles and different scenarios. If I had a Civic and a MA, I would probably really hesitate. If I had a Caravan and a MA, I would hesitate. I'd consider a different seat. However, I do know this - the only *harnessed* seat tested in the Civic was the MA. There were a few combos tested as boosters and a backless (or 2?), but no other harnessed seats were tested in the Civic. Would other seats have done the same thing? We honestly don't know. Maybe they would have, maybe not. I have not looked through for exactly what seats were tested in the Caravan yet.

I'm only trying to point out that we don't know how other seats would perform in these vehicles, but we do know how these seats performed in other vehicles (the MA did have crash tests in numerous other vehicles where it did *not* rip through the shell, as we know).

So all that said, I'd take the information I do have and go from there.
1) We can see that HE is a big deal. You need room, especially as a bigger/older child.
2) Higher profile seats require even more room, therefore, I'd maybe consider a lower profile seat in a situation where the room wasn't available.

This was a very interrupted post, so I apologize if it's disjointed (darn kids! hehehe. j/k).

I have to admit that watching the videos of the FF MA were really disturbing and do have me questioning if I want to use mine FF. At the same time I have to remember that a MA kept my son safe in a FF collision when my FIL hit a dear going highway speeds and totalled his vehicle.

Ok, I'm really freaking out. DS2 is in a FF MA in our 07 civic. I can't watch the videos because the laptop hates me but everything I've been reading spells B-A-D.

Can someone PLEASE tell me in layman's terms what TC showed?? I do have a radian he can go into but he absolutely loves his cow seat and will be heart broken if he can't use it anymore. Of course safety is my #1 but I just wanted to see if I could get some clarification first.

Sorry if this has been mentioned, but I didn't have time to read through all the responses. Did anybody else notice that a vast majority of the seats tested had the same manufacture date...? This makes me wonder if it caused false testing results because as you all know, once a seat has been crashed it may not hold up properly for the next crash.
All though, only the RF test videos have the date of manufacture listed.

Still a thought...

NannyMae said:

Sorry if this has been mentioned, but I didn't have time to read through all the responses. Did anybody else notice that a vast majority of the seats tested had the same manufacture date...? This makes me wonder if it caused false testing results because as you all know, once a seat has been crashed it may not hold up properly for the next crash.
All though, only the RF test videos have the date of manufacture listed.

Still a thought...

Click to expand...

They did reuse seats, however, any seat that had been used before and failed was excluded from the data. Therefore, any seat that failed and still made it into the study was being crashed for the first time.

3plus2isme said:

Ok, I'm really freaking out. DS2 is in a FF MA in our 07 civic. I can't watch the videos because the laptop hates me but everything I've been reading spells B-A-D.

Can someone PLEASE tell me in layman's terms what TC showed?? I do have a radian he can go into but he absolutely loves his cow seat and will be heart broken if he can't use it anymore. Of course safety is my #1 but I just wanted to see if I could get some clarification first.

Click to expand...

They tested the Marathon in the Civic twice. Both were 2006 Civics, 56.4 km/hr, with the H-III 6yo dummy, full frontal rigid barrier crash. One was installed with lower anchors and top tether, the other was installed with lower anchors, top tether, and seatbelt (lap-shoulder). In both cases, the harness ripped out of the shell at the shoulders and the top of the dummy's head impacted the back of the front seat. The dummy's hips were still being restrained by the seat. Similar results (harness ripping out) occurred in the Ford Fusion, and Dodge Caravan, both installed with lower anchors and top tether. It did not rip out in the other 14 tests.

The Radian-in-Tacoma video showed me that it's important to have enough room for head and knee excursion. It's an extended cab truck, and the dummy went splat into the back of the front seat. It hardly looked like the Radian did anything to restrain the dummy (though I'm sure it helped some). After seeing that video, I will look for excuses not to put a FFing child in the back seat of an extended cab truck. Heck, I think even an adult wouldn't fare well back there. There just is no room for excursion. [I'm grateful that my father and FIL both have full-size crew cabs now and no longer have extended cab trucks.]

NannyMae said:

Sorry if this has been mentioned, but I didn't have time to read through all the responses. Did anybody else notice that a vast majority of the seats tested had the same manufacture date...? This makes me wonder if it caused false testing results because as you all know, once a seat has been crashed it may not hold up properly for the next crash.
All though, only the RF test videos have the date of manufacture listed.

Still a thought...

Click to expand...

You got the response above but I have a thought that if it were me, I probably want to see how a re-used seat w/o obvious damages would perform comparing to a seat w/o being in a previous collision. You know, we and everyone under the sun (except for some insurance companies) say to replace a carseat after a collision.

hipmaman said:

You got the response above but I have a thought that if it were me, I probably want to see how a re-used seat w/o obvious damages would perform comparing to a seat w/o being in a previous collision. You know, we and everyone under the sun (except for some insurance companies) say to replace a carseat after a collision.

Click to expand...

And in the United States at least, NHTSA (who has studied this extensively) and several manufacturers also say you don't always have to replace after every crash. But I agree, it would be interesting to see the performance difference (if any) between a pre-crashed seat and a new one.

This is my same thought about having the newer MA with the higher weight limit and the same 6 year old dummy. To see if the harnessed rip out in the same vehicles and same speeds

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this!

Pixels said:

The Radian-in-Tacoma video showed me that it's important to have enough room for head and knee excursion.

Click to expand...

Anyone have any data on how much room is enough room? How much room between the front of the child's head and the back of the seat in front of it is ideal?

I know that in all cases you should always strive for the car seat & vehicle seat postion combo that gives any FF children the most room, even if you can't get the ideal distance. But if you have a choice (i.e. buying a new vehicle and/or car seats), what is the minimum you'd be comfortable with?

I would have to go back and look at the test standards again, but memory says it's about 32 inches straight forward from the seat bight for an untethered seat (US) or a booster, 28 inches for a tethered, harnessed seat. Based on US testing requirements, I haven't read Canadian ones but I understand they are substantially similar.

Pixels said:

I would have to go back and look at the test standards again, but memory says it's about 32 inches straight forward from the seat bight for an untethered seat (US) or a booster, 28 inches for a tethered, harnessed seat. Based on US testing requirements, I haven't read Canadian ones but I understand they are substantially similar.

Click to expand...

In the US, the head excursion in testing is measured from a reference point that is approximately 5 inches behind the seat bight on the test bench.

I actually thought the Cdn HE requirements were tougher, hence the need for TTg. I seem to vaguely recall that there is no legislative requirement for TTg, its just that no seat can meet the Cdn HE numbers without TTg.

That is just vaguely what is coming to mind, perhaps Trudy/Nicole/Tam or Allport could address that issue as our resident instructors.

Canadian head excursion requirements match tethered US requirements. US also has an untethered requirement which is not quite as strict.

bubbaray said:

I actually thought the Cdn HE requirements were tougher, hence the need for TTg. I seem to vaguely recall that there is no legislative requirement for TTg, its just that no seat can meet the Cdn HE numbers without TTg.

That is just vaguely what is coming to mind, perhaps Trudy/Nicole/Tam or Allport could address that issue as our resident instructors.

Click to expand...

The original info that we gave you is that there was no top tethering requirement on Canadian seats, that all that mattered was the head excursion value and if a seat was able to meat the HE requirement without a top tether, then it wasn't mandatory that a manufacturer require it. However, a few months ago I was a party to some communication which brought forward that top tethering is actually required by standards in Canada.

So regardless of whether a seat can meet the head excursion requirement or not without a top tether, all ff'ing seats must be equipped with top tethers in order to meet CMVSS 213 standards.

I want to reassure you that what you're remembering is correct based on what you were taught in class, this is information that has been recently received by myself in the last few months. (And being that it is so detailed and technical in nature, it is not something that I have considered passing on to those who were in the class since it doesn't change the bottom line in terms of the message given to parents or the requirement that all seats be top tethered... perhaps Nicole and I will discuss that and consider a mass email to the class to clarify the matter... It's been mentioned on a few threads around here, but obviously we can't assume that everyone will see those threads. )

eta: Pixels is correct that the HE amount of 720mm in CMVSS 213 standards is the same as the top tethered amount in the FMVSS 213 standards. The difference is that US standards allow for 2 different head excursion numbers, and I believe the wording is actually such that if a seat didn't have a top tether at all it wouldn't be required to meet the 720mm #, rather only the higher # (900mm IIRC, but I'm not positive on that.) However, given that LATCH has been mandatory since Sept 2002, all seats in the US now have a top tether, meaning that all seats in the US must pass the 720mm head excursion limit when top tethered. So for all intents and purposes, from a numerical requirement point, top tethered seats in the US meet the same HE standard as ff'ing seats in Canada. There is just the double standard in the US which doesn't exist in Canada.

snowbird25ca said:

I want to reassure you that what you're remembering is correct based on what you were taught in class,

Click to expand...

LOL. And you guys thought I was sleeping....

Just for grins, the untethered max for HE for seats in the US is 813mm