Differences in new CA65 from CA

swtgi1982 · Nov 7, 2010

I have noticed some structural differences for those who wonder. There is an extra plastic piece (kinda like a foot) that is in that gap under the seat between the bottom of the seat and the front foot part of it. So structurally there is differences. I have not looked much closer but that is what I have noticed. I will post pictures of that piece later tonight.

Cryssy Jane · Nov 7, 2010

Can't wait to see pix.

swtgi1982 · Nov 7, 2010

joolsplus3 · Nov 7, 2010

It's funny they used the exact same holes in the seat that used to hold the base on. Wanna try install it RF just to see if those 'skis' make it any easier to get a decent recline? (we got the 65's at work the same day they hauled our BRU test bench out and threw it away

)

swtgi1982 · Nov 7, 2010

joolsplus3 said:
It's funny they used the exact same holes in the seat that used to hold the base on. Wanna try install it RF just to see if those 'skis' make it any easier to get a decent recline? (we got the 65's at work the same day they hauled our BRU test bench out and threw it away )

Mine is installed RF and I did not notice any real difference then the others from it. I think it is more support for FF. It puts more of the base on the seat when FF, since in many vehicles the front hangs over the seat edge.

swtgi1982 · Nov 10, 2010

It appears that they are just there for more stability when FF

Differences in new CA65 from CA

swtgi1982

New member

Cryssy Jane

New member

swtgi1982

New member

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician

swtgi1982

New member

swtgi1982

New member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics