Will you be changing your seat usage in response to TC's videos?

Are you changing your seat usage in response to TC's crash videos?

  • Yes

    Votes: 27 32.9%
  • No

    Votes: 17 20.7%
  • Not sure/maybe?

    Votes: 38 46.3%

  • Total voters
    82

3plus2isme

New member
My head is spinning!

So if you had a 39lber riding in a MA in a civic would you personally put him into a radian instead? DH & I were finally able to watch the vids and were horrified but then he wondered if putting DS2 in his MA in the middle would be a better option (with DS1 in a radian outboard and baby girl in her SS1 once she arrives.) If I give DS2 the radian then DS1 will be in his parkway sg full time which isn't ideal (I wanted to keep him harnessed til he couldn't be anymore) but I want what's best for them and will deal with buckling him in myself (to tight for him to do it at this age.)

We do drive in our F150 half the time but I hate driving it when we have a lot of errands (I'm a lot 'greener' then dh lol) and the boys are in FNs in there.
 
ADS

hipmaman

Moderator - CPST Instructor
My head is spinning!

So if you had a 39lber riding in a MA in a civic would you personally put him into a radian instead? DH & I were finally able to watch the vids and were horrified but then he wondered if putting DS2 in his MA in the middle would be a better option (with DS1 in a radian outboard and baby girl in her SS1 once she arrives.) If I give DS2 the radian then DS1 will be in his parkway sg full time which isn't ideal (I wanted to keep him harnessed til he couldn't be anymore) but I want what's best for them and will deal with buckling him in myself (to tight for him to do it at this age.)

We do drive in our F150 half the time but I hate driving it when we have a lot of errands (I'm a lot 'greener' then dh lol) and the boys are in FNs in there.

Do you have a Civic and a ff MA?

We are not saying the RA would be better in the Civic because we just don't know. There was no tests available this time. I think the RA was mentioned in the various posts because there are owners owing both MA and RN and might have made the choice of using a ff RN instead.

Are you asking if moving the ff MA into the middle bench in the Civic is better? Again, we don't know whether it's the outboards positions or the whole back bench ends up taking the bulk of the energy resulted in a collision.
 

emandbri

Well-known member
I put forth this query on carseatblog and I'll put it here, too, for public discussion.

What opinion do we have on the fact that the Cosco AIOs and the Compass booster both got good marks for lap belt fit before and during impact, and no increased abdominal load was noted during impact, despite the fact that we've long noted those two seats for having terrrible lap belt fit?

TC tested them with the 6 and 10 year old dummies which I am thinking has better belt fit then the 3 and 4 year olds we see using the seats.
 

Pixels

New member
I wasn't thinking of the specific vehicles (don't know enough about those). I was thinking for example: Let's take the Toyota Tacoma. It seems to me that everyone is agreed the problem isn't so much with this truck in particular (apparently great safety ratings!) but with the back seats of trucks in general. They simply don't have enough room for passengers to ride back there. So knowing that I think I won't be buying a truck unless I can be sure I won't need to put my kids in the back of it. (Of course, I know a lot of people don't have the luxury of choice, but since I don't own a car now I can afford to think about these things.)

[snip]

It is my understanding that back seats aren't tested at all when compiling safety ratings. The safety of back seat passengers isn't considered so how high the safety rating is for a certain car doesn't address these concerns. But now we have some data that might help us as consumers to address some of them in choosing a car.

There's a world of difference between a crew cab and an extended cab. Many crew cabs have as much room as a sedan. Extended cabs, no.

In the US, back seats aren't tested at all. Nor is the front center seat, if there is one. Only the front driver and passenger seats. It is my understanding that in Europe, they do test the back seat. It would probably be helpful to try to look at European testing results as well as North Amercian results when choosing a vehicle, keeping in mind that the "same" vehicle isn't 100% the same in the two markets. Also, you may have to hunt for the corresponding vehicle, as the names aren't always the same. For example, the Honda Fit (US) is also known as the Jazz (Europe).
 

simplychels

New member
No I wont be changing anything right now. DD is rf'ing in a tethered MA. that was one of the only crash test out of them all that didnt make me cringe even slightly, I think it performed excellent!

I have a radian XT on preorder and of course will be tethering that one rf'ing as well. I have such a long way to go before we ff that none of this applies to us right now.


However, I will take a few things into consideration when asked which seats to recommend and possible usage in terms of when to switch an infant from their bucket into a convertible. If more seats were built to accommodate newborns, after watching these I might even suggest skipping buckets. But right now i'd still like to see youngins in buckets just to ensure proper fit!

I was also surprised to see the seats do better with both UAS and seatbelt being used. I wonder if someday after more extensive testing they'll allow the use of both?


ETA: thanks to the person who discussed how these tests really show why we need to replace seats after a crash, you're right they did their job and it did just look REALLY nasty in some of the tests but really it cant all be rainbows and butterflies now can it. Hopefully these results arent viewed by too many seat ignorant folk and misunderstood prompting more illegal and dangerous usage in an attempt to avoid some of the scary looking results.
 

mimieliza

New member
Unlike CR, TC specifically states that these tests are not meant to rank or compare seats.

These videos should not be used to compare one product to another. Transport Canada did not do these tests to rate, rank or endorse individual seats. Testing conditions represent some specific situations and not all possibilities. Testing conditions may also vary between seats. The tests did reveal how various seats behaved during crashes and how this behaviour varied with the method of installing the seat in a vehicle.

So I feel pretty secure in not running out and replacing my Boulevard (since it wasn't even one of the seats tested) or my SS1.

If I were buying a brand new seat, I would definitely consider the Radian XT. But that's the the seat I've been coveting for awhile anyway, so it's not really a change for me.

I still maintain that:
reasonably safe vehicle + a reasonably safe seat + proper usage = excellent chance of survival in almost all crashes
 

jujumum

Well-known member
Regarding the MA harness ripping through the shell when ff in the Caravan & the Civic, I am horrified. However, I've watched each ff MA video about 5 times each, and it looks to me that the MAs are more upright in the Caravan & Civic than the other cars. The Durango & Murano installs have spaces/gaps at the base of the seat shell, whereas the Caravan & Civic don't.

As we all know, the BV/MA/DC have a built in natural recline. I am not a tech an don't know anything about the laws of physics. However, I installed my ff Britax seats as upright as possible in my van, forcing them into that position. Based on these videos, I'm going to reinstall my BVs (my only ff Britax seats at the moment) at more of the natural recline that the BV wants to fit, rather than forcing a more upright install. Perhaps the more upright install in the Caravan & Civic put more forces at the shoulder vs. the crotch area and that contributed to the failure.

Like I said, I have no clue what I'm talking about, but that is what I'm going to do for now. My dd is only 35lbs and her seats are BVs, so hopefully the seat would perform as intended. However, I'm now leaning heavily to moving up my Frontier purchase to sooner rather than later. I just wish that they tested it, too.
 
Last edited:

snowbird25ca

Moderator - CPST Instructor
Would you also extrapolate this to the BLVD then too since they are the same shell and it was the shell that failed? That only makes sense, but then perhaps there is some difference in the two seats that makes these results un-extrapolatable (sure, it's a word...). Thoughts Trudy?

I am pondering this right now, and am not sure I could predict one way or the other because I can see both sides. The fact that the blvd has only one set of harness slots, which may serve to make the back of the shell stronger overall - less holes, less potential points of weakness. But really - it's all speculative. If the issue is really just the strength of the plastic, then I somehow doubt that it's going to be any difference between the # of sets of slots, but I can't really say either way.

But the Honda Civic is a IIHS top safety pick: http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=300

As is the Toyota Tacoma: http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=300

The MA failed catastrophically in the Civic and the Radian had HUGE HE in the Tacoma.

I'm actually taking the opposite from these test results -- you can drive a very safe vehicle and have catastrophic crash results.

JMHO.

It wasn't that the Radian had huge HE in the Tacoma, it was that there was just very little room between the backseat and the front seat, resulting in the appearance of huge excursion... when in reality it may have been completely normal excursion in a greatly reduced space. In the event of there being more backseat space available, I do not think the results would be quite so shocking.

I'm in agreement with someone else that the results weren't catastrophic - TC said that the numbers were within acceptable ranges in most cases.. I think it's really that we're just not accustomed to seeing what a real world crash would look like, and it's naturally shocking to see.

To the person who mentioned the observation regarding the recline difference between the MA's which had the harnesses pulled through vs. the ones who didn't, you could be on to something. I've long felt that Britax had a reason for making the seats naturally install more reclined. I had assumed it was that it somehow increased SIP, but perhaps it also has some relation to the way force is placed on the shell of the seat...
 

HEVY

New member
Forgive me, I have not read everything here or in the link, it's too much reading for me to grasp.

From what little I read I am getting the impression that most test crashes are done at about 30mph and that these we are talking about are at about 50+mph. Is this right? Doesn't really help advocate for CRs :( RF is the scariest, I'm used to seeing how well RF does on impact and these tests show the opposite.

These tests are scary, especially since I drive on the highway frequently exceeding 55+mph.

Now I'm probably going to put the second row all the way back again.

Hmmm, the safest for DD would be to remove the second row and slide the third row all the way up and stick her in the middle, then I would have to use the recline bar and lose harness height, and still have no room for the TB.
The Regent didn't do too bad though.
 
From what little I read I am getting the impression that most test crashes are done at about 30mph and that these we are talking about are at about 50+mph. Is this right?

These tests are scary, especially since I drive on the highway frequently exceeding 55+mph.

Two quick points ...

1) Speeds are given in km/h so you're looking at around 35 mph.
2) Remember that even though you drive more than 55mph, you would have slowed down some by the time of impact in a crash. It would be rare to be hit while traveling at full highway speed.
 

emandbri

Well-known member
Speaking of reclined, I liked how the seats that ended up more reclined did in the crash test. I now feel much better about using the my ride forward facing which is good since I am not not going to use the marathons forward facing.

The cosco high back clones also did better then I thought they would, I feel better about giving them out at checks. Still think we need to give out seats with taller slots though.
 

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
In the US, back seats aren't tested at all. Nor is the front center seat, if there is one. Only the front driver and passenger seats.

I would not assume that just because FMVSS doesn't have testing parameters for the safety of back seats, that means that auto manufacturers do not test them in some way. If they didn't have any safety standards (internal or external), then we'd still all have lapbelts and benches with no headrests, whereas head restraints, three point belts, and curtain airbags are all standard now.:twocents:
 

hipmaman

Moderator - CPST Instructor
I would not assume that just because FMVSS doesn't have testing parameters for the safety of back seats, that means that auto manufacturers do not test them in some way. If they didn't have any safety standards (internal or external), then we'd still all have lapbelts and benches with no headrests, whereas head restraints, three point belts, and curtain airbags are all standard now.:twocents:

:yeahthat:

R&D, innovation, compliance, etc. all involve doing something new, different, better. And by doing so, manufacturers (in most industries) rely heavily on lab or 'real world' tests to tell them where things must be changed, can improved, can be done cheaper but retain the same benefits if not improve them, etc.

Just because things are not in the public domain or mandated, it does not mean that these tests do not exist. Companies compete against one another to sell 'better' products that have to based on some kind of test results (and not to forget market demand) to change their design criteria.
 

bubbaray

New member
I'm in agreement with someone else that the results weren't catastrophic - TC said that the numbers were within acceptable ranges in most cases.. I think it's really that we're just not accustomed to seeing what a real world crash would look like, and it's naturally shocking to see.


Sorry, but I really have to disagree on this point. I totally think that the videos of the MA in the Civic and the Caravan (which is what I was referencing in my post on this) depict catastrophic failures of those seats. Restraints are designed to restrain a child in a crash. In those two vehicles, the MA did not perform to design -- it did not restrain the child because the straps pulled through. ETA: and I specifically referenced the safety of the Civic, which is widely acknowledged to be an extremely safe vehicle for its class. Hence my comment that you can drive a safe vehicle (ie., the Civic) and still have catastrophic failure of the restraint (ie., MA video).

If the results of the MA in the Civic and Caravan are within acceptable ranges, there is something very very wrong there. We're not talking head excursion, we're talking BODY excursion because the straps failed.

The Civic and the Caravan are both top-selling vehicles. There are a LOT of those vehicles on the roads with child restraints in them.

I can't understand why there hasn't been a recall on the MA -- TC will issue recalls over labels missing French for cripes sake. TC should at the very least issue a recall warning parents that the MA failed in Civics and Caravans.

JMHO.
 

Pixels

New member
I would not assume that just because FMVSS doesn't have testing parameters for the safety of back seats, that means that auto manufacturers do not test them in some way. If they didn't have any safety standards (internal or external), then we'd still all have lapbelts and benches with no headrests, whereas head restraints, three point belts, and curtain airbags are all standard now.:twocents:

Oh, there are safety standards, absolutely. Three point belts are required in all rear seating positions, seatbelts have to be a certain strength, lower anchors and top tethers must meet certain strength testing, etc etc. But the seats are not dynamically tested, that is what I meant. And with no testing, there is no pass/fail or ranking based on the "injuries" the dummy received.

Do manufacturers do their own internal dynamic tests? Hopefully. Is any of that information released? No. When I am buying a car based on how safe it is, all I have to go on are the test results of the front seat occupants and my perception of the brand. Basically I'm hoping that a vehicle with good ratings in the front will also perform well in the back, which is in reality probably a foolish thing to bank on (though the best anyone can do). Manufacturers know that those front seats will be tested and the results made public. They work to get the best ratings in those front seats that they can. The back seats are more of an afterthought.
 

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
Ah, gotcha. And given that the back seat is statistically a good 35% safer than the front, they (FMVSS, particularly) don't really have any huge motivation to concentrate on it too much (hence why we are still missing adequate headrests for tall people and good belt geometry for small people, because what we get now is 'good enough', I guess).
 

InternationalMama

New member
Sorry, but I really have to disagree on this point. I totally think that the videos of the MA in the Civic and the Caravan (which is what I was referencing in my post on this) depict catastrophic failures of those seats. Restraints are designed to restrain a child in a crash. In those two vehicles, the MA did not perform to design -- it did not restrain the child because the straps pulled through. ETA: and I specifically referenced the safety of the Civic, which is widely acknowledged to be an extremely safe vehicle for its class. Hence my comment that you can drive a safe vehicle (ie., the Civic) and still have catastrophic failure of the restraint (ie., MA video).

Sorry, I think Snowbird25ca and I were talking about a different thing than you were if this is what you meant. When you said catastrophic test results I interpreted you to be meaning that the results of the crash were catastrophic. Which made sense to me because we were discussing vehicles at the time and not carseats specifically. And also because it is really the results of the crash that we all care about. (What my seat looks like after a crash is not my concern, what my child looks like is.) I completely agree that these were catastrophic failures of the seats in some cases, but I don't think that is the same thing as "catastrophic test results." The MA failed in a spectacular way, but it did a lot of work to save that dummy. By the time the seat was falling apart and the harness was flying out a lot of the impact of the crash had already been absorbed and when the dummy hit the seat in front of it it was not as a completely unrestrained passenger, as I understand it the dummy was still restrained in the seat by the lower part of the harness and its speed would have been significantly slowed by the harness before the failure. I think it's important to remember that even when the test looks like it has a terrible result these results are "within acceptable ranges," meaning acceptable for the dummy not for the seat's performance.
 
Last edited:

NannyMom

Well-known member
So what is it about the Civic and Caravan that made the MA not do so well? Is it because the seats were more upright as someone mentioned? Was it because of the design of the seatbelts (or did it happen with LATCH too)? If it's the interaction of the seatbelts, what other vehicles are similar? Do we think it would happen in the Accord like it does the Civic?
 

bree

Car-Seat.Org Ambassador
Regarding rear passenger safety, I think we could also glean some information from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's crash tests. They look at rear passenger safety in their side impact tests. It's not perfect, of course, because it's an adult dummy only (and I believe only on 1 side). But at least it is readily available for the public to review.
 

Pixels

New member
So what is it about the Civic and Caravan that made the MA not do so well? Is it because the seats were more upright as someone mentioned? Was it because of the design of the seatbelts (or did it happen with LATCH too)? If it's the interaction of the seatbelts, what other vehicles are similar? Do we think it would happen in the Accord like it does the Civic?
The two failures in the Civic, one was seatbelt and top tether, the other was lower anchors, top tether, and seatbelt. I don't remember how it was set up in the Caravan or the Ford Fusion (where it also had similar results).

I think trying to speculate about crash energy management differences vs seatbelt geometry differences vs installation angle differences is opening a whole can of worms with no real answers. Unless and until someone goes back and runs tests specifically looking for the answers to the question of why it failed in some tests and not others, all we can do is speculate.

Regarding rear passenger safety, I think we could also glean some information from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's crash tests. They look at rear passenger safety in their side impact tests. It's not perfect, of course, because it's an adult dummy only (and I believe only on 1 side). But at least it is readily available for the public to review.

If I'm remembering correctly from when I bought my car in 2002, there was a test result available for side impact testing. They put two dummies in the vehicle, one in the driver's front and one in the passenger rear. Then they did a side impact test on the driver's side. The information on the opposite-side back seat passenger really didn't help me any. Now, if they had put that dummy on the same side, that would have been helpful. So would have pictures so that I could make some determination about passenger space vehicle intrusions. There weren't any available. Nor was any information on how a rear passenger would fare in a frontal impact.

Again, that's all if I'm remembering correctly, and I'm sure (I hope!) they've changed how they're doing things in the last 7+ years.

Editing after looking at my records: IIHS didn't do any testing on my vehicle, at least not that I found. NHTSA did some sort of side impact testing of both front and rear seat, that is what I was remembering. I don't have the text that describes the test procedure, and the tiny pic is too grainy to even make out where a dummy is/was. It did have a pic but not at an angle where you can actually see vehicle intrusion into the passenger space.
 
Last edited:

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Forum statistics

Threads
219,655
Messages
2,196,895
Members
13,530
Latest member
onehitko860

You must read your carseat and vehicle owner’s manual and understand any relevant state laws. These are the rules you must follow to restrain your children safely. All opinions at Car-Seat.Org are those of the individual author for informational purposes only, and do not necessarily reflect any policy or position of Carseat Media LLC. Car-Seat.Org makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis. If you are unsure about information provided to you, please visit a local certified technician. Before posting or using our website you must read and agree to our TERMS.

Graco is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org! Britax is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org! Nuna Baby is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org!

Please  Support Car-Seat.Org  with your purchases of infant, convertible, combination and boosters seats from our premier sponsors above.
Shop travel systems, strollers and baby gear from Britax, Chicco, Clek, Combi, Evenflo, First Years, Graco, Maxi-Cosi, Nuna, Safety 1st, Diono & more! ©2001-2022 Carseat Media LLC

Top