Question Harness vs. seatbelt/booster

I was invited here to let you all disabuse me of the thought that harnesses are safer than seatbelts/boosters.

I have read until my eyes crossed trying to find anything saying a harness is not safer than a booster, or that a booster is just as safe as a harness.

Please educate me, because the person who sent me here wasn't inclined to do so. Also, please understand, I am not here to only create strife (which I have been informed this topic does), but on the assumption that most people who visit this site are looking for facts and reliable information because they want their children as safe as possible in a vehicle. I personally prefer to make educated decisions about my children's safety, based on the information available, as do many others, I'm sure.

These are my thoughts/proof of my assertion at this time:

1. It's been said for many years using a harness as long as possible is safest. I first researched this subject in 1999, when I used info found online (can't begin to remember where it came from) to convince my husband we needed a Fisher Price Futura when it came out (Jan/Feb 2000) rather than the Cosco HBB we were using for our 2 year old at the time. (He was more than 40lbs at that point.) I used crash testing video(s) from a carseat website in 2004 to convince him we needed Britax Huskies instead of BPBs for our sons because they were nearing the limit of the Futuras. I realize recommendations can change, however this is the first time I've ever seen someone say it isn't safer to harness longer.

2. I'm not a huge fan of gov't agencies/regulatory agencies/etc that set the regulations for child passenger safety. I feel they seriously drop the ball on it, as evidenced by it taking until 2011 to recommend RF to at least age 2, when it has been proven for years to be safer. That said, for the moment they serve my purpose.

NHTSA says:

Recommendations For All Ages
Select a car seat based on your child's age, height, and weight.
Keep your child in the car seat for as long as possible, as long as your child fits the seat's height and weight requirements.
All children under 13 should ride in the back seat. Link

Click to expand...

Keep your 4 to 7 year old children in their FORWARD-FACING car seat with a harness until they the top height or weight limit allowed by your car seat's manufacturer. Link

Click to expand...

SafeKids says:

Recent American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommendations (March 2011) urge parents to keep children in a harnessed car seat for as long as possible. Depending on your car seat and child's weight or height, you may be able to keep your child rear-facing longer before adjusting the car seat to face forward. Use the full harness for as long as the seat allows. Link

Click to expand...

Use a forward-facing car seat correctly and until the harness no longer fits (convertible or combo seat) in a back seat every time your child rides in a car. Many harnesses today serve kids to 50, 60, 80 or even 100 pounds.
<snip>
If you have a heavier or taller child, find a car seat with a harness that fits larger children. Some seats hold children up to 80 or even 100 pounds.
<snip>
Take the next step to a booster seat when you answer “yes” to any of these questions:
Does your child exceed the car seat’s height or weight limits?
Are your child’s shoulders above the car seat’s top harness slots?
Are the tops of your child’s ears above the top of the car seat? Link

Click to expand...

Transport Canada:

It is safest to keep your child in each stage for as long as possible.

Link

Click to expand...

Forward-facing seats are for older children with stronger back and neck muscles. As long as your child fits within the weight and height ranges of his or her rear-facing seat, it is best to use that seat for as long as possible. Link

Click to expand...

AAP says:

All children 2 years or older, or those younger than 2 years who have outgrown the rear-facing weight or height limit for their car safety seat, should use a Forward-Facing Car Safety Seat with a harness for as long as possible, up to the highest weight or height allowed by their car safety seat’s manufacturer.
<snip>
All children 2 years or older, or those younger than 2 years who have outgrown the rear-facing weight or height limit for their car safety seat, should use a Forward-Facing Car Safety Seat with a harness for as long as possible, up to the highest weight or height allowed by their car safety seat’s manufacturer. It is best for children to ride in a seat with a harness as long as possible, at least to 4 years of age. If your child outgrows his seat before reaching 4 years of age, consider using a seat with a harness approved for higher weights and heights.
<snip>
Booster seats are for older children who have outgrown their forward-facing car safety seats. All children whose weight or height is above the forward-facing limit for their car safety seat should use a Belt-Positioning Booster Seat until the vehicle seat belt fits properly, typically when they have reached 4 feet 9 inches in height and are between 8 and 12 years of age. The owner’s manual that comes with your car safety seat will tell you the height and weight limits for the seat. As a general guideline, a child has outgrown his forward-facing seat when any one of the following is true:
He reaches the top weight or height allowed for his seat with a harness. (These limits are listed on the seat and also included in the instruction booklet.)
His shoulders are above the top harness slots.
His ears have reached the top of the seat.
Link

Click to expand...

Carseat.org says:

2) Use a seat with an internal harness as long as possible (40-90 lbs). See the list on the other side. Link (this is a PDF file)

Click to expand...

All these agencies seem to agree that we should be using a harness as long as possible. Why do they think that? Obviously CPST courses are teaching that neither is safer than the other, why are they teaching that? (Particularly when SafeKids' website says use the harness as long as possible.) Where did the info come from that a 3 point seatbelt is just as safe as a 5 point harness? Where did the info about head excursion and HIC come from that people now say is the reason for a booster?

I see it said repeatedly there is no data/testing for over 5 on harness vs booster so they are considered to be equally safe. When did that become the mantra and why? (Can someone link me to the testing for under 5? I wasn't able to find that in my searches over the past couple of days either.)

thepeach80 links crash testing comparing harness to booster in this thread from 2006, does anyone know where to find those videos today?

3 CPSTs in this thread from 2008 prefer a 5 point over a booster, though it is stated that there is no testing to prove it. Leads me to believe this information came to a forefront at some point between 2006 and 2008, but when, why, and how?

I get that 6 seems to be the magic age when most think it is OK to go from harness to booster, I understand about maturity, brain development and impulse control for that logic.

Thanks for any input, hopefully this thread will be educational for others besides myself.

ETA: I have a 16 month old, the rest of my children are 12-19. My little guy currently does not have a carseat, he has outgrown his Keyfit30, I absolutely hate the Graco SmartSeat, so it's on its way back to Graco right now, and the Radian XTSL I am praying will fit in at least 2 of my vehicles won't be here until Tuesday. I want this information to make decisions about what seats to use for the little one, particularly if the Radian doesn't fit my vehicles.

It's dependent on fit and maturity. Seatbelts just don't fit little kids well even with a booster - the lapbelt rides up high on the stomach or the shoulder belt rides up on the neck, and it won't do its job that way.

And even if it does fit well, if the child doesn't stay properly seated for the whole ride, including while sleeping, the belt will not do its job either.

Around age 5-6 is when these things generally start to not be an issue. If the belt fits properly and the child sits correctly there is no information either way about which is safer.

I imagine the stance of extended harnessing is to keep people from putting two and three year olds in boosters, as has been the trend in some places. The advice I've seen here is use the harnessed seat until it's outgrown, and if the child is old enough and mature enough, move to the booster.

You will not cause strife asking this question, so please don't worry about that. It's a completely valid topic to question. Feel free to ask and to question the answers that you receive. I hope you won't be offended if you receive links to older threads; it's just this topic tends to come up on occasion, so sometimes it's easier to present you with available info versus rehashing. In my opinion, the only time this question causes strife is when people are presented with facts and refuse to accept them, but instead continue to hold onto their own personal beliefs as fact, rather than opinion.

To begin: There is no research showing that children who are mature enough to use a booster properly should remain in a harnessed seat. There is no research showing that harnessed seats are safer than boosters (or vice versa) for children mature enough to use boosters.

I wish that we had research to present to you to help answer your questions, but the fact remains that no such research exists. There is plenty of research showing that children 4-8 years old are safer in boosters than in the seat belt alone and that boosters do their job by protecting those children from injury. However, there isn't research comparing harnessed 4-8 year olds with boostered 4-8 year olds.

I think that a parent who chooses to harness a child who could otherwise be boostered is making a perfectly valid decision. There's no research showing it isn't safe to continue to use a harness (provided the car seat is installed correctly and the child still fits in the seat appropriately). My 6 year old daughter is still harnessed, and I don't have plans to booster her (at least in our main car) anytime soon. That's my decision, and I'm comfortable with it. However, and this is my key point, my decision is not based on research, and consequently, it's not a viewpoint that I force on other parents precisely because I have no valid research supporting my decision to harness her at this age. A parent who chooses to booster a 6 year old has made an equally valid decision, in terms of safety, based on the information available to us.

I'd like to touch on some of the quotes from sources that you provided. I'll admit I scanned over them, because I've read them before, so forgive me if I've misread anything. For instance, the NHTSA one that kids 4-7 year old should remain harnessed until they outgrow their seats. That's a great recommendation, but it doesn't mean to continue to buy harnessed seats for, say, a 5 year old who has outgrown a Marathon. It means that once they outgrow their seats, put them in boosters. It also isn't supported by research (well, the "use a booster" part is, but not the "keep them harnessed as long as possible" part); there wasn't a study on 4-7 year olds that NHTSA looked at to determine that 4-7 year old should be in harnesses as long as possible. The harness as long as possible thing began when safety advocates were trying to keep 2 and 3 year olds in harnessed seats (particularly back when seats harnessed to only 40 pounds). It's not based on any current research suggesting that older children should be harnessed. In fact, the AAP thing that you quoted demonstrates that. It mentions considering buying a new harnessed seat for kids under 4 who have outgrown their old seats, not for kids older than 4.

Hmm, the stuff for kids under 5. There isn't really much research for kids under 5 comparing booster with harness, either, at least not that I'm aware of. I'm thinking that it refers to a study looking at booster seats that also looked at some harness versus booster data for 3 and 4 year olds. There may be at least one other older study out there as well, because I've seen this info mentioned several times. It was just linked in a previous thread related to your question. But, hopefully someone might be able to provide a better link for you with one or more studies.

As to why this info really came to a forefront in 2006-2008, I'd posit a couple of interrelated theories. 1) More and more seats were being introduced at that time that had higher top harness slots and harnessed past 40 pounds. People with 2, 3, and 4 year olds that may have been too big for the majority of harnessed seats just a few years previously could be kept harnessed (and most importantly, in an affordable manner) with the new seats being developed. Because people were encouraged to buy harnessed seats for young kids, coupled with that old recommendation to keep them harnessed as long as possible, some of that got transferred to the older crowd who could still fit in these seats. 2) There was a story about a 3 year old who passed away in a vehicle crash while using a booster during that time frame. There was some hysteria on the Internet about it, and some people began purchasing harnessed seats for their 5, 6, 7, 8, 9+ year old kids who had been appropriately using boosters previously. While the message that there are kids who are too young for boosters is valid, techs and other safety advocates really began to look at the literature to see if there was any research supporting harnessing older children. When there wasn't any research supporting that, it became important to share that info with parents, particularly those would were overreacting. There may have been a time within the past decade, especially with all the higher weight harnessing seats, that some techs may have been comfortable recommending purchasing a harnessed seat for a 5 or 6 year old, for instance. It still might be presented as an option to want to do that, but without any research to support that recommendation, those recommendations became fact based rather than the old "harness as long as possible" being applied to a situation without data to support it. That's been especially true over the past 3-4 years or so, when presenting links to studies has become even more common, as there are no studies to provide showing the difference between harnessing and boosters for older kids.

One final note, based on something I've seen mentioned here in the past: In Sweden, where they have been researching car seat safety for nearly half a century now, they booster instead of using a harness forward-facing. So many parents look to them as the model of safety when it comes to Extended Rear-Racing, yet so many parents are quick to reject their years of proven safety with young children in boosters. I wonder why that is? I don't have an answer to that question (because I firmly believe that children should be rear-facing until at least 3 or 4 years old if possible, but I still have my 6 year old harnessed! ), but I do think it's food for thought.

Good luck with your research! I'm sure others will be along with more opinions, data, and info to share. I know in particular I didn't get to the head excursion/HIC stuff, but I bet someone else will touch on that.

Hey Bree you didn't left anything for us to say!!! In my opinion and I am not a tech or anything like that, just a mom, I don't like boosters for children how are not 40 pounds yet even if they are 5 y/o, I don't like a 3 y/o how weights 40 pounds in a booster either, I think it have to be a combination between the age and the weight just as is for the RF-FF situation but this is just my opinion and I don't like when people get "offended" by it, I am not trying to underestimate all the techs here but because there is no real evidence that one thing is better than the other it make more sense to be if I have the seat for it to keep them harness as long as possible or as long as my seat allows it, not all the children hit the 40 pounds before age 5, my goddaughter use her highback cosco harness booster until her 6 birthday when she hit 40 pounds, now she is in a graco turbo booster. This is only my opinion and I do not have any facts or research to go with it.

Yeah, what Bree said.

bree said:

One final note, based on something I've seen mentioned here in the past: In Sweden, where they have been researching car seat safety for nearly half a century now, they booster instead of using a harness forward-facing. So many parents look to them as the model of safety when it comes to Extended Rear-Racing, yet so many parents are quick to reject their years of proven safety with young children in boosters. I wonder why that is? I don't have an answer to that question (because I firmly believe that children should be rear-facing until at least 3 or 4 years old if possible, but I still have my 6 year old harnessed! ), but I do think it's food for thought.

Click to expand...

I believe it is this which is what caused the sea-change of CPST opinions here on this site- in particular, AdventureDad, a poster here from Sweden, has been at times vehement in his advocating of NOT using harnesses. His arguments are pretty strong and I think it was those threads which softened many long-time advocates/members of this board to the notion that maybe 5pts isn't always better. Simultaneously, car seat manufacturers were responding to consumer/advocate pressure, as well as a perceived obesity epidemic, to increase harness capacities and releasing mainstream seats that would harness to higher weights and heights.

Thus we are here, where just a few years ago safety advocates were saying "harness as long as possible!" "Every step 'up' in car seats is a step down in safety!" to now, where "harness as long as possible" might well mean harnessing into puberty, and where we are less convinced that a child with typical proportions and the maturity to understand the importance of keeping the belt positioned (and to actually KEEP the belt positioned) is actually safer with the shoulders held back while the head can fly forward than using the manufacturer's purpose-built system (the seatbelt, with a booster to position it properly) for restraining passengers.

Most seem to have come to a middle point, suspecting that a harness is likely not detrimental even for a child who could be in a booster, but also recognizing that a properly used booster is a very safe choice.

Qarin said:

Most seem to have come to a middle point, suspecting that a harness is likely not detrimental even for a child who could be in a booster, but also recognizing that a properly used booster is a very safe choice.

Click to expand...

I agree with that observation.

I also wanted to add something I've said before, but will repeat for the benefit of others. The "harness as long as possible" mantra started during a time when we were lucky to have 4-year-olds fit in harnesses. It was an attempt to keep 2- and 3-year-olds from moving to boosters too early.

In the past few years there has been an explosion of high-weight, high-harness seats that CAN keep kids harnessed much longer than before. And there's nothing wrong with that--it's actually a great thing to have so many options.

But I'm not sure "harness as long as possible" really NEEDS to apply to 8-year-olds as much as it does preschoolers. Rather than getting into details and caveats, it's a lot easier for agencies and advocates to encourage something that won't harm the older set while still providing the necessary protection for younger kids.

LISmama810 said:

I agree with that observation.

I also wanted to add something I've said before, but will repeat for the benefit of others. The "harness as long as possible" mantra started during a time when we were lucky to have 4-year-olds fit in harnesses. It was an attempt to keep 2- and 3-year-olds from moving to boosters too early.

In the past few years there has been an explosion of high-weight, high-harness seats that CAN keep kids harnessed much longer than before. And there's nothing wrong with that--it's actually a great thing to have so many options.

But I'm not sure "harness as long as possible" really NEEDS to apply to 8-year-olds as much as it does preschoolers. Rather than getting into details and caveats, it's a lot easier for agencies and advocates to encourage something that won't harm the older set while still providing the necessary protection for younger kids.

Click to expand...

I think Jennie and I tend to be of one mind, lol. I follow along behind her :yeahthat:-ing her a lot. There are always trends in every subject you research, whether it's carseats, vehicles, high chairs, etc. Back when my 11.5 yr old ds was a baby, it was commonplace for parents to put their 2-3 year olds in boosters because we simply didn't have a harnessed seat that was readily available for them. The Futura was difficult to find, though it truly was a pioneer with lots of good ideas (serpentine belt path, sitting low on the seat cushion). Unfortunately, I still see 3 yr olds going straight to boosters. I'm sure it must be for convenience, but I can't imagine the kind of nagging that goes on in those vehicles to keep kids sitting straight in the seatbelt (that is, if their parents aren't too lazy to get off their darn cell phones and look in the mirror!).

I'm of the mindset that harnessing for longer is better simply because of side impacts. I've seen enough crash test videos to know that in booster seats, the dummies are thrown all over the place in side impacts. However, we don't have any studies *proving* that either is safer over the other. Yes, AdventureDad is vehement in his rf-booster stance, but never once has he *shown* us with hard data and studies that it's safe, despite numerous requests. Skeptical minds therefore think it doesn't exist. We're not here to discuss him, though.

Side impacts aside, there's the issue of neck loads on ff harnessed seats vs. booster seats. Again, there's speculation that the neck loads are much higher on ff harnessed seats because the child's body isn't allowed to move with the crash: basically the head flies forward. A boostered child's whole torso moves because there is so much more freedom in a seatbelt.

Maturity is very important with booster use. A child simply isn't protected by the seatbelt if he's not *in* the seatbelt during a crash. My kids are older (11.5 and 9) and I still have to remind them not to lean out of the shoulder belt. Even though a younger child may be more subservient and willing to follow instructions, he's likely to be more impulsive as well and reach for dropped items.

It's a tough call and really is individual after age 4-ish. I don't like to see such young kids in boosters, but sometimes it's the best option for their situation given financial situations.

Convenience is another factor in the decision to harness or booster. I know, I know, convenience shouldn't be a determining factor when it comes to my child's life, but in reality, it is. School drop-offs and pick-ups may require speed in getting the child out of the car, though usually, by the time they're going to school, they're of the age where booster use is OK. I know that with my kids, they couldn't maneuver their harnesses as well as the seatbelt and I had to tighten the harness because they didn't have the strength to do it as snugly as I thought it should be.

So, there are all my thoughts on it for now. Hopefully it makes some sense since one of my kids was talking in one of my ears while I was typing.

Catalytic said:

these agencies seem to agree that we should be using a harness as long as possible. Why do they think that? Obviously CPST courses are teaching that neither is safer than the other, why are they teaching that? (Particularly when SafeKids' website says use the harness as long as possible.) .

Click to expand...

Though I'm not looking at my manual, I don't believe that the CPST curriculum is teaching that neither is safer. The vast majority of techs are seeing 3 and 4 year olds in boosters, so the curriculum is really focused on keeping kids harnessed until they're mature enough to sit properly in a seat belt with a booster. Techs here don't exactly reflect the curriculum, they're much more widely read and (I think) have a wider range of informed opinions. For what its worth, I really think the safekids website is a better reflection of the CPST curriculum than this board is.

Just popping in to say I haven't forgotten I posted, I'm still reading and researching (around school and work unfortunately). By any chance is there a list somewhere of current convertible, combination, and booster seats? (Is the 2010 NHTSA list complete?)

KaiLing said:

Though I'm not looking at my manual, I don't believe that the CPST curriculum is teaching that neither is safer. The vast majority of techs are seeing 3 and 4 year olds in boosters, so the curriculum is really focused on keeping kids harnessed until they're mature enough to sit properly in a seat belt with a booster. Techs here don't exactly reflect the curriculum, they're much more widely read and (I think) have a wider range of informed opinions. For what its worth, I really think the safekids website is a better reflection of the CPST curriculum than this board is.

Click to expand...

I know we covered boosters being as safe *for children old/mature enough for a booster*. Not sure if it was covered in the text or just by the instructors though...:scratcheshead:

I know that the 2010 list can't possibly be complete because several new seats have come out this year. Is there a particular reason you're interested in combination and booster seats? I ask because you don't have a child the right age for one.

lourdes said:

I am not trying to underestimate all the techs here but because there is no real evidence that one thing is better than the other it make more sense to be if I have the seat for it to keep them harness as long as possible or as long as my seat allows it

Click to expand...

It makes sense for you to do it for your kids and that's great, but it doesn't make sense to recommend it to others with no facts/research.

Your example of a 40# 6yo in a Cosco combination seat -- most 40# 6yos have outgrown that seat by height (shoulders above the top strap slots). It's safer to have a 40@# 6yo in a good booster than in an outgrown harnessed seat.

That's my biggest problem with the "harness as long as possible" line of thought: I've seen plenty of booster-age kids in outgrown harnessed seats because their parents watched the KDM video and came away thinking that boosters are deathtraps. Harnessing big kids is well and good (my own child was harnessed past her seventh birthday -- I'm not anti-extended-harnessing). But properly used, properly fitting boosters are very safe choices and parents should not be scared of them.

Pixels said:

I know that the 2010 list can't possibly be complete because several new seats have come out this year. Is there a particular reason you're interested in combination and booster seats? I ask because you don't have a child the right age for one.

Click to expand...

Because they are the topic at hand. I have no intentions whatsoever of putting my almost 17 mo old in either one for a very long time. (I don't know yet WHAT I'm going to use for him, the XTSL doesn't seem to fit the '06 Santa Fe I'm driving. Fairly certain it will fit my Silverado 2500, though, so DH may have to take the Santa Fe until I can get the Radian to work, or find SOMETHING that will fit this asinine seat and seatbelt design Hyundai's "brilliant" engineers came up with)

I think the answer to the harness vs seatbelt lies with the carseat manufacturers, and I do think, after talking with SK today, that it HAS been tested. I'll be able to better support that after some more research, so I'm not going to make any claims/thoughts/theories/hypothesis' right now.

Catalytic said:

Because they are the topic at hand. I have no intentions whatsoever of putting my almost 17 mo old in either one for a very long time. (I don't know yet WHAT I'm going to use for him, the XTSL doesn't seem to fit the '06 Santa Fe I'm driving. Fairly certain it will fit my Silverado 2500, though, so DH may have to take the Santa Fe until I can get the Radian to work, or find SOMETHING that will fit this asinine seat and seatbelt design Hyundai's "brilliant" engineers came up with)

I think the answer to the harness vs seatbelt lies with the carseat manufacturers, and I do think, after talking with SK today, that it HAS been tested. I'll be able to better support that after some more research, so I'm not going to make any claims/thoughts/theories/hypothesis' right now.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure how car seat manufacturers could have the answer to the harness versus booster seat debate. Sunshine Kids (or Diono as it will soon be officially known) is a company with a really great convertible (in fact, 9 years after the AAP said that companies should make seats that RF to 45 pounds, SK is the only company with a seat that RF to 45 pounds) as well as a great booster. It's nice that SK makes some of their crash test data available to the public. But SK does not have the definitive real-world crash data we need to determine harness versus booster safety for older kids (nor does any other manufacturer). Research comparing harnessed seats to booster seats in crashes for older kids hasn't been conducted (some partial reasons for why we don't have that data include that there are so few children over the age of 4 who are harnessed & that sometimes when data is collected on crashes, it is just assumed that children 4 and over are in boosters whether they were boostered or harnessed). I don't want to sound like I'm against extended harnessing, because I'm not (especially considering my 6 year old is still harnessed). I think it's awesome that you're spending so much time and effort researching this issue. I hope I'm not coming across as the contrarian who just wants to promote booster usage over harnesses, because that's definitely not the case. I'm just a geeky mostly-lurker who tends to provide links or rambles about how tall the shell of the Graco My Ride is for rear-facing, all while using a ton of unnecessary parentheses and really long paragraphs.

It may be possible (though I consider it unlikely) that SK has come up with some sort of crash test series comparing the 6 (or even 10) year old crash test dummy in a Radian (their harnessed seat) to the Monterey (their booster) and is willing to share the results when customers contact them rather than publicizing them. Even if such a crash test series existed, its application to the general harness versus booster question would be limited for a number of reasons. Some reasons off the top of my head include: 1) it wouldn't necessarily apply to other manufacturers' seats, 2) it can't be corroborated by real-world crash data, 3) the 6 year old dummy isn't 100% analogous to a real child in terms of certain measures (I've seen issues with the neck and abdomen mentioned before, as an example), and 4) any test that SK designed themselves wouldn't have standards or peer review mechanisms in place like government-mandated crash tests or crash test conducted for journal articles.

It would be really interesting if SK did have a study comparing a dummy in a Radian to a dummy in a Monterey. That would help provide us with some evidence in a Radian versus Monterey debate, but it wouldn't provide us with definitive proof in a harness versus booster debate, because of the limitations of that data. It's just wouldn't be enough info on which to base a decision or make a generalization about harness versus booster usage as a whole. For instance, if SK's research showed that a Monterey was safer than a Radian for a 6 year old crash test dummy, I would take that info into consideration, but I wouldn't move my 6 year old daughter out of her harnessed seat into a Monterey (or any other booster for that matter) based on that information.

If we aren't referring to SK having either real-world crash data or direct crash test comparisons of their harnessed seat versus their booster seat when we talk about info they might have for us, then I'm not sure what data they would posses that would help us decide whether a harness or booster is safer for older children. Just having a convertible seat that they test with a 6 year old or 10 year old dummy that passes any applicable government tests or NCAP tests or any other test that SK decides to run or invent doesn't mean that a 6 or 10 year old needs to be in a harnessed seat. Their Monterey booster passes all applicable tests with a 3 year old dummy, but that doesn't mean that a 3 year old needs to be (or even belongs at all) in a booster seat.

As for a complete list of all the different kind of seats, NHTSA's website does have many. HealthyChildren.org (maintained by the AAP) has a decent list, too, and car-seat.org has a Measurements Database that has many seats, too. For the most up-to-date info on seats that have been released, just keep hanging out here at the car-seat.org forums. For instance, I don't think any of the lists have the Graco Argos or many of Dorel's new seats, but the info about those seats is posted here in various threads of the car-seat.org forums. So, if you have questions about seats, this really is the best place for all the most recent info. I hope you will share any information you find from your research with us, as well.

I think I have it all worked out in my head now (not the answer, but which manufacturers have the answer)

Take all booster-only seats out of the equation for now. The seats that should, if I am thinking this correctly, have the answer are the convertibles that turn into boosters, and the combination seats.

(I do know that dedicated boosters seem to be preferred over some of the convertible/combo seats as boosters, but I don't know which seats those are.)

Booster seats are required by NHTSA to be tested, too, right?

My thought process:

Somehow the upper weight limit of any seat has to be established. I am assuming at this point that is done through crash testing.

For seats that have a harness and can be a booster, that would mean two different tests, one to get max weight of the harness, and one to get max weight of the booster with a seatbelt. (I'll be honest, I'm not sure why boosters have a max weight, if seatbelts don't)

SK says they test at 35mph, 5mph more than required by NHTSA. (I may have the number wrong, I know she said it was 5mph more than NHTSA requires, though)

The new Radians (via Diono, not SK) turn into boosters. The manual recommends harnessing until the child outgrows the harness, and they raised to low limit on the booster option to 50lbs due to 5 point spreading the crash forces over more of the body than 3 point. From a business standpoint, they know not everyone is going to use the harness to its potential weight/height, thus the 50lbs.

She (SK CPST I talked to) mentioned we should look into the new Ford inflatable seatbelts as a reason to harness longer. She said the reason Ford developed them is to spread the crash forces over more of the body, which is the same point behind harnessing as long as possible. She said it would probably take an engineer analyzing the crash test data to prove that harnessing longer doesn't increase the risk of head injury (like the ones we talk about when comparing them to NASCAR), and commented that an individual human body is only going to withstand so many Gs, regardless of the type of restraint.

Anyway, my rambling here is that I think the carseat manufacturers who test their seats as both a harnessed seat and a booster have the answer. I know most don't share their crash testing data with the public, which is crap imo, so we can't see hard data nad numbers, but we CAN see their recommendations in the car seat manuals. (Does that make any sense? It's 4am and I'm tired!)

Also have been reading trying to figure out how many Gs are involved in various crashes, and read this article about why NASCAR drivers were getting the basilar skull fractures without HANS.

No firm answer, but that's my train of thought right now.

The problem with your theory is that, in order to sell seats, most manufacturers are going to make their seats fit as many kids as possible. That means the obese kids (90 lb. limit on the ProSport) who are young, and the older, taller, skinny kids (30 lbs. booster minimum on many combination seats, like the Nautilus.)

Inflatable seatbelts are, to me, a better argument for using them with boosters than with a harness- since a harness only has 5 points of restraint across which the forces are mainly spread, while a booster would properly position the belt to restrain the child AND allow the forces to be spread across the torso WHILE preventing neck strain from stopping against a harness. Same reason that the European style shield boosters are easier on the neck than a 5-point harness, and as safe or safer.

I really think that if there is a difference, either way, it's small enough that after a certain age, it's almost irrelevant.

I would prefer to see kids in ANYTHING that is properly used than NOTHING. I have no problem with you harnessing your kids until they are 12 if they fit. I also have no problem with my 7 year old, who sits properly, in a high-backed booster. (Well, except that she'd rather rear-face. LOL.)

ketchupqueen said:

The problem with your theory is that, in order to sell seats, most manufacturers are going to make their seats fit as many kids as possible. That means the obese kids (90 lb. limit on the ProSport) who are young, and the older, taller, skinny kids (30 lbs. booster minimum on many combination seats, like the Nautilus.)

Inflatable seatbelts are, to me, a better argument for using them with boosters than with a harness- since a harness only has 5 points of restraint across which the forces are mainly spread, while a booster would properly position the belt to restrain the child AND allow the forces to be spread across the torso WHILE preventing neck strain from stopping against a harness. Same reason that the European style shield boosters are easier on the neck than a 5-point harness, and as safe or safer.

I really think that if there is a difference, either way, it's small enough that after a certain age, it's almost irrelevant.

I would prefer to see kids in ANYTHING that is properly used than NOTHING. I have no problem with you harnessing your kids until they are 12 if they fit. I also have no problem with my 7 year old, who sits properly, in a high-backed booster. (Well, except that she'd rather rear-face. LOL.)

Click to expand...

If I understood you correctly, you are saying use an inflatable seatbelt with a booster instead of a 5 point? If so, that isn't what the SK CPST meant. She was saying to compare the seatbelt to a 5 point, ie, the purpose of both is to spread the crash forces over a larger portion of the body.

About the ProSport, they say at least twice in the manual (pdf file) that harness is safer than booster, bolding and capitalization is theirs: A child is ALWAYS safest in a child restraint system that has a 5-point harness system built in. RECARO cannot recommend what age your child has to be in order to ride in this seat as a belt-positioning booster, please refer to your state’s law, as each state’s law is different.

Yes, but they have an agenda in promoting that...

There are always going to be trade-offs. The dummies we have do NOT accurately test for much of the harm that could be done in a 5-point harness with a larger, older child.

The point is that there really isn't a true, head-to-head, real-world comparison that assesses ALL of the risks.

Also, that children of an appropriate age, size, and maturity in a well-fitted booster, properly used, are very, very safe.

There comes a point where the difference in safety, if it exists, is so small as to be insignificant.