Britax Video...

njkj · Aug 19, 2010

Britax posted this video on facebook and in the begining it talks about the RF limit and shows a shot of a girl in the BV70. This girls head is CLEARLY above the shell so I posted this comment:

When you show the girl rear facing in the BV70 her head is CLEARLY above the shell of the seat. SO does this mean the 1 inch rule applies to the head wings and NOT the outer shell?????

I wonder what the answer will be?? I plan to call if I do not get a responce b/c if it is an inch below the SHELL then the should NOT show it being used any other way KWIM.

yetanotherjen · Aug 19, 2010

njkj said:
Britax posted this video on facebook and in the begining it talks about the RF limit and shows a shot of a girl in the BV70. This girls head is CLEARLY above the shell so I posted this comment:

When you show the girl rear facing in the BV70 her head is CLEARLY above the shell of the seat. SO does this mean the 1 inch rule applies to the head wings and NOT the outer shell?????

I wonder what the answer will be?? I plan to call if I do not get a responce b/c if it is an inch below the SHELL then the should NOT show it being used any other way KWIM.

I agree!

You know if they had added a higher grade plastic around the EPP foam in te blvd70 (like a better plastic that was used on the old blvd) instead of just using the epp in the head wings, they probably could have tested the seat rfing using the head wings rather than just the shell. kwim

DaniannieB · Aug 19, 2010

I saw that, too.

Why would the headwings even need to be reinforced? They used to go by the tips of the ears even w/ the shell for RF (similar to Sweden I believe). Then they changed to head even with the top of the shell (like some of the Dorel seats now). Finally they decided to conform w/ industry standards (for the US, which are now changing again) and follow the 1" rule. RF is so much safer to the head and neck than FF; I think they should go back to the original tips of the ears even w/ the shell rule. Then kids like that girl would fit RF, the shells would still be smaller to fit better in cars RF, etc.

montanamama · Aug 19, 2010

I'm in one of my prego not so nice moods so I also posted on their facebook about the video hopefully they will clarify or take the video down. my post it the one with my DD RFing in her now destroyed Avenue that was attacked by the bear a few weeks ago.

joolsplus3 · Aug 19, 2010

I think the possibility that parents might misuse seats and children ramp up and out and be at risk of severe head injury because their heads are so close to the front seatbacks is what spurred on the 1-inch standard. Even when Britax touted the tops of ears rule, one of the experts from Saferidenews mentioned it might not be the best idea. Though maybe with the new harness system it's easier to get the harness right and it might not be so critical (the 1 inch rule is somewhat for misuse factors, to add a cushion for kids whose parents don't use seats right)? Transport Canada also had a problem with seats performing poorly when the harness was in the top slots RF (there were some recalls years ago, IIRC, when Britax allowed the tops of ears RF).

cowgirlsmommy · Aug 19, 2010

If only there was a car seat version of Failblog I would submit this

Irishmama · Aug 19, 2010

I can't wait to hear what they say!

DaniannieB said:
Finally they decided to conform w/ industry standards (for the US, which are now changing again) and follow the 1" rule.

What are the standards changing to, do you know? Or can you not share?

montanamama said:
I'm in one of my prego not so nice moods so I also posted on their facebook about the video hopefully they will clarify or take the video down. my post it the one with my DD RFing in her now destroyed Avenue that was attacked by the bear a few weeks ago.

Holy cow! A bear? I will never complain about dirty covers again!

DaniannieB · Aug 19, 2010

The "industry standard" they changed to is the 1" rule... the changes I was referring to were mainly the head even w/ the headrest/shell change that Dorel has made.

Irishmama · Aug 20, 2010

Gotcha, thanks!

njkj · Aug 20, 2010

I just got off the phone with Debra at Britax and she watched the video while I was on the phone with her. She clearly sees what everyone else does and said she would find needs to look it to it. She took down my number and is going to call me back with her findings.

sb518 · Aug 20, 2010

I just watched the video and am not seeing what you saw. Did they change it??? AHhh duh. I see it now. The SHELL. DUH.

glockchick · Aug 20, 2010

It's 16 seconds in. The girl is sitting rear facing and her head is clearly above the shell.

Aurezalia · Aug 20, 2010

It's still there, Tumble. About 16 seconds in.

I'll be really interested to hear their answer on this...

MomToEliEm · Aug 20, 2010

tumblebug said:
I just watched the video and am not seeing what you saw. Did they change it??? AHhh duh. I see it now. The SHELL. DUH.

I still see it. Go to 0:16 in the video. There is a girl sitting rearfacing in the carseat. Her head is above the shell of the seat, though still contained within the headrest portion of the seat.

edited to add: I guess I was too slow in my posting and a couple others already posted the same info.

cookie123 · Aug 20, 2010

The ff big boy in green shirt looks smooshed in there!

NicoleCPST · Aug 20, 2010

Looks like they pulled it, the video and post are gone now.

canadiangie · Aug 20, 2010

I can still see it.

glockchick · Aug 20, 2010

I just refreshed the page and it shows up.

SafeDad · Aug 20, 2010

yetanotherjen said:
I agree!

You know if they had added a higher grade plastic around the EPP foam in te blvd70 (like a better plastic that was used on the old blvd) instead of just using the epp in the head wings, they probably could have tested the seat rfing using the head wings rather than just the shell. kwim

I'm not even sure what federal standard applies to the rear facing height limit. Does anyone know? There is no vehicle seat in front on the test bench. I think the main issue is ramping toward the front. The secondary issue is presumably whiplash protection should be adequate until the tops of the ears are at the top of the shell. I wonder if it is just an internal decision, possibly based on consistency of message, rather than one based on design factors.

As a side note, remember that you have to measure perpendicular to the back of the child seat. When the seat is installed at an angle, if you measure parallel to the ground, it might appear the child has outgrown the shell height limit even though they have not. The camera angle doesn't help, either. Plus, the head restraint section makes this even harder to see because the head is not right up against the shell. I suspect that viewed and measured correctly, it may well be that the child is closer than 1" to the top of the shell, but it probably isn't far beyond that and not nearly as bad as it looks.

Of course, to avoid confusion, they could have simply used a different angle or shorter child. Or, just change the guidance and the video will be A-OK

njkj · Aug 20, 2010

She called back to inform me that the are looking into it futher and will get back to me but it probably will not be untill Monday.

Britax Video...

New member

CPST Instructor

Ambassador - CPS Technician

New member

Admin - CPS Technician

New member

New member

Ambassador - CPS Technician

New member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Moderator

New member

Senior Community Member

New member

New member

CPSDarren - Admin

New member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics