LOOKING for the seat with the TALLEST TOP SLOTS (convertible)

F

fingersdoublecrossed

New member

• Nov 29, 2009

• #1

Hi there;

My nephew is a really LONG-BODIED little guy and my SIL would like to keep him RF longer AND just in general, have the SEAT last longer.
His issue is that he's quite LONG-BODIED...like I said.

She's considering the TF and the Radians...is the 2010 XT have higher topslots or just a higher RF limit?
Also the My ride 65.

Right now, he's 16months and not very heavy...basically, he's in the mid range for weight and height but if there WERE such a thing as a TORSO percentile he'd be off the CHARTS!!
Right now, he's RF in a A-Omega.

So basically, we're looking for the convertible with the highest topslots (more than the highest weight like most people would be looking for)...if the 2 can coincide, that would be great too.
I'm just getting some CONFLICTING info and could USE some assistance.

Thanks in advance,
Julie

 

featherhead

Well-known member

• Nov 29, 2009

• #2

For convertibles it would be between the Radian, Complete Air, and True Fit. It often varies from car to car as to which has the tallest slots. The Complete Air has the tallest shell, so it would last the longest height wise for rear-facing.

 

Misty-Bug

New member

• Nov 29, 2009

• #3

The TF and the Radian are pretty much similar in harness height to one another. The thing I personally don't like about the true fit is how it looks so wide and spacious. I don't know about it fitting a smaller kid well. It would fit them but they would look like they were drowning in it.
I have a radian and I like it. I have a TF in the car too but I still like the radian over the TF. It is a tall shell and will last RFing for a long time.

All the Radians have the same top harness height. The 2010 just has different latch connectors and a few other little things like RFing weight limit but the harness height is the same

 

carseatcoach

Carseat Crankypants

• Nov 29, 2009

• #4

I think measured flat the Complete Air has the tallest harness, but different seats install differently in different cars and that can affect useable harness space.

 

snowbird25ca

Moderator - CPST Instructor

• Nov 30, 2009

• #5

The complete air definitely has more growing room height wise of the convertibles - I think it measures at 18.5" or somewhere around there for top harness height.

There is about 1/2" difference in fit between the TF and Radian based on how the seats fit dd in our vehicles. She has about 1/2" left in the TF and about 1" left in the Radian. I prefer the TF over the Radian for a number of reasons - harness is easier to adjust, harness height is super easy to adjust as well, less install issues, and perhaps most of all - my dd likes it where as she doesn't like the Radian. The TF interior is wider than the Radian, but the side wings are deep enough that my dd is able to sleep in it whereas she can't sleep in the Radian due to her head flopping forward and it waking her up every time she starts to drift. (The Radian is the only seat she's complained about, and the only seat my dh doesn't like either... It's also the only seat she has difficulty sleeping in.) The Radian is a nice enough seat, just doesn't work for us.

I think in terms of longevity, that most of the seats she's considering will work fine. Kids do slow down in their torso as they get older, and their legs do catch up. Though my ds who just turned 3 still has a long torso compared to other kids his age...

 

F

fingersdoublecrossed

New member

• Nov 30, 2009

• #6

Thanks ladies, this is GREAT information....
Now I guess I will ask which SEAT has the tallest SHELL??
I love to hear the opinions...thanks alot!! :thumbsup:
Julie

 

snowbird25ca

Moderator - CPST Instructor

• Nov 30, 2009

• #7

fingersdoublecrossed said:

Thanks ladies, this is GREAT information....
Now I guess I will ask which SEAT has the tallest SHELL??
I love to hear the opinions...thanks alot!! :thumbsup:
Julie

Click to expand...

True Fit. Though I think the CA and Radian both come in close 2nds.

 

featherhead

Well-known member

• Nov 30, 2009

• #8

snowbird25ca said:

True Fit. Though I think the CA and Radian both come in close 2nds.

Click to expand...

I thought the Complete Air and True Fit were the same shell height, but since the CA says to use till the top of the headrest rear-facing, you actually gain one inch.

 

Pixels

New member

• Nov 30, 2009

• #9

featherhead said:

but since the CA says to use till the top of the headrest rear-facing, you actually gain one inch.

Click to expand...

The CA also has a 40" height limit for rear facing. Some people are comfortable ignoring that limit; I am not. Since I will not go against the manual and the manufacturer's instructions, the CA would not last long RFing by height.

The Radian allows use until 53" or tops of ears even with the top of shell, so technically it goes the highest. However, I am not comfortable going beyond the one inch rule, which leaves the TrueFit as the tallest usable seat.

 

carseatcoach

Carseat Crankypants

• Nov 30, 2009

• #10

Since this is in the Canadian section, I think the height limit on the CA is even lower than 40", but the limits on the TF and Radian are also quite low, IIRC.

 

snowbird25ca

Moderator - CPST Instructor

• Nov 30, 2009

• #11

chickabiddy said:

Since this is in the Canadian section, I think the height limit on the CA is even lower than 40", but the limits on the TF and Radian are also quite low, IIRC.

Click to expand...

Canadian limit on the CA is 36" rf'ing. Radian is 32" rf'ing - no better than the AO currently being used.

For tallest shell without a numerical height limit you have TF, followed by My Ride and EFTA. The MR will give maybe 1 to 2" more than the EFTA. None of the 3 seats have a numerical rf'ing height limit.

 

L

La-Di-Ma

New member

• Dec 1, 2009

• #12

snowbird25ca said:

Canadian limit on the CA is 36" rf'ing. Radian is 32" rf'ing - no better than the AO currently being used.

Click to expand...

Are many kids going to get to 40lbs before they get to 36"? How useful is that lovely 40lb RF limit with a 36" height restriction? I'm thinking of my own daughter, who is fairly solidly built, and hit 40lbs and 40 inches at the same time.

 

snowbird25ca

Moderator - CPST Instructor

• Dec 1, 2009

• #13

La-Di-Ma said:

Are many kids going to get to 40lbs before they get to 36"? How useful is that lovely 40lb RF limit with a 36" height restriction? I'm thinking of my own daughter, who is fairly solidly built, and hit 40lbs and 40 inches at the same time.

Click to expand...

I think it really depends on the child. My kids wouldn't have come anywhere close, but they are opposite ends of the growth charts when it comes to height and weight... like over 75th for height and 25th for weight type of opposite ends.

I have multiple thoughts, but mostly I'm just glad that it's higher than 32" which the MA and Blvd/Blvd CS are still plagued with, along with the Radian and other Dorel infant/child seats.

Many parents do make the parental decision to use the seat over the numerical height limit. I've made that decision for my ds who is 38", but won't use it past 40" for him. I think there is a reason for the 40" and because I have a good enough grasp on the potential physics reason for the limit I wouldn't exceed the 40" limit that the US seats have on them. That being said, I know that the 32" limit is more arbitrary than physics related on the other 32" seats, and that the overall rf'ing weight limit isn't being factored in to the height limit on those seats... so I do feel differently about the realm of parental decision when it comes to those. Though my preference is still to use a seat without a numerical rf'ing height limit when there is one available that meets my needs. :thumbsup: