Britax 70's rfing legroom?

melniemi

New member

• Jul 27, 2010

• #1

I didn't see info about this in the blog. Has it been checked out yet? Is there more legroom than the original Britax seats? Thanks

 

3acorns4Christy

New member

• Jul 27, 2010

• #2

I would love to know that too.

 

SafeDad

CPSDarren - Admin

Staff member

• Jul 27, 2010

• #3

I hope to answer this with comparison photos in the next couple weeks. It looks like it might be a little better, but I really can't tell until I get together with someone who has an original version.

 

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

• Jul 28, 2010

• #4

View attachment 7720

View attachment 7721 \

ETA: MA70 top, DC bottom. There should be at least an extra 2.5" of leg room on the new convertibles based on these measurements.

 

Last edited: Jul 28, 2010

melniemi

New member

• Jul 28, 2010

• #5

Thanks for the pics. When ma is installed rfing, the adjuster part is not touching the back of the seat so it kinda adds to the legroom, if you know what I mean. I'm so torn! lol

 

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

• Jul 28, 2010

• #6

FYI - I have more pics of the MA70 installed rf with kids that I'll be posting in one of my earlier MA70 blog posts shortly. It seemed silly to make a new blog entry for them when I already have 3 MA70 blogs posted so I'm just going to add them to Part II (hopefully tonight). Special thanks to Erika (lilypadmom) for letting me borrow her two beautiful DDs for this photo shoot.

 

glockchick

New member

• Jul 28, 2010

• #7

Dang it. Now I may need one. Or two.

 

A

Athena

Well-known member

• Jul 28, 2010

• #8

Kecia said:

FYI - I have more pics of the MA70 installed rf with kids that I'll be posting in one of my earlier MA70 blog posts shortly. It seemed silly to make a new blog entry for them when I already have 3 MA70 blogs posted so I'm just going to add them to Part II (hopefully tonight). Special thanks to Erika (lilypadmom) for letting me borrow her two beautiful DDs for this photo shoot.

Click to expand...

Will your pics and post help provide an answer to that burning question about the shell height and how that will affect when children will outgrow the seat by height rear facing? Please? Pretty please?

 

SafeDad

CPSDarren - Admin

Staff member

• Jul 28, 2010

• #9

Athena said:

Will your pics and post help provide an answer to that burning question about the shell height and how that will affect when children will outgrow the seat by height rear facing? Please? Pretty please?

Click to expand...

If not, I hope mine will. I think I will have photos of a couple 35-40 pounds kids within 2 weeks or less if all goes according to schedule!

 

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

• Jul 28, 2010

• #10

New MA70 pics have been posted in Part II of the blog review (scroll to bottom)!

http://carseatblog.com/?p=6527

 

SafeDad

CPSDarren - Admin

Staff member

• Jul 28, 2010

• #11

Wow I'm surprised! She's about the the same height as my 5yo DS but clearly more in the legs than torso based on these pics. To me it looks like you even measured a bit conservatively for the 1" rule- if the ruler was perpendicular I think it would be a bit more than an inch? ;-)

 

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

• Jul 28, 2010

• #12

Yeah, she's definitely a leggy 45". As far as measuring for the 1" rule - I tried to be accurate but it's all so subjective. Regardless, she's close to outgrowing it in the RF position either way (by wt or ht) and she's close to outgrowing it by ht in the FF position too.

 

melniemi

New member

• Jul 28, 2010

• #13

The baby's legs look like they almost fill the seat already. Do you think it has more legroom than the old marathon?

Thanks

 

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

• Jul 28, 2010

• #14

Based on measurements alone - it should. But it's going to take some direct side-by-side, installed-in-the-vehicle comparison shots before we can tell how much more leg room we really should expect. Hopefully Darren will be able to provide those types of comparison pics in the near future.

 

melniemi

New member

• Jul 28, 2010

• #15

Thanks!!

 

M

Momof4Girls

New member

• Jul 29, 2010

• #16

Does this particular 5 y/o fit, by height, in the current MA? (Disclaimer: It is misuse for this particular 5 y/o to ride in the current MA RF regardless, since their weight is over 35lbs!)

 

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

• Jul 29, 2010

• #17

According to her Mom (who is also a tech) - she has just about outgrown her FPSVD (same shell as the DC and RA50 I believe) by height. HTH!

 

L

LilypadMom

Senior Community Member

• Jul 29, 2010

• #18

Momof4Girls said:

Does this particular 5 y/o fit, by height, in the current MA? (Disclaimer: It is misuse for this particular 5 y/o to ride in the current MA RF regardless, since their weight is over 35lbs!)

Click to expand...

I have a FPSVD and a Boulevard. I just put the FPSVD in the car to check and her shoulders are exactly even with the top slots ff'ing. They way she has been growing lately (and eating) I give her 1 more week before she is definitely above. She is VERY leggy though, I was able to keep her rf'ing in the Boulevard until she hit 33 pounds and was 3 years 5 months.

I couldn't find the Boulevard to check the harness height on that, but my husband just told me where it was so I can go put her in it if anyone needs me to. Did you want me to see if she would still fit in the FPSVD by height rf'ing?

 

cookie123

New member

• Jul 29, 2010

• #19

Thanks for the photos. Does anyone else think the crotch strap looks really short on the 3 month old?

 

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

• Jul 29, 2010

• #20

The crotch strap on the MA70 is actually longer than the one on the original MA (comparison pic in that same blog). Baby was wearing a thick cloth diaper in those pics so she was super padded and that may be why it appears that way.

 

Last edited: Jul 29, 2010