Regent apporpriate for a skinny, tall child...?

Mami · Sep 16, 2007

I have been torn between getting a Regent or Como/Signo for my 4 yr old dd who is 30 lbs (has been for a year...), 41" with a 14.5" torso.

I would like the seat I get her now to be her last harnessed car seat but I would also like it to last her as long as possible. I'm just not sold on the Regent even though I realize at present it is the seat that will last my child the longest considering she needs all the height she can get. What's all this I've been reading about the Regent being for obese kids? My daughter is the polar opposite of obese, lol. So, would the Regent even be appropriate for her? Would something more narrow be better for her? If so, what? Thanks for your help!

CrabbyBunchX3 · Sep 16, 2007

The regent is not only for obese kids.
You can see a picture of my 3.5 yo DD in her regent in my siggy.

jennsmile · Sep 16, 2007

At 30lbs she could still rearface maybe but not in a Regnet. And no Regent are great for Tall kids, not just obese ones.

Jenn

ZephyrBlue · Sep 16, 2007

My 4.5yo, 39" 29-30lb DD fits well in the Regent- you can see her here: http://img5.ranchoweb.com/images/balessingo/lexiregent.jpg

That said, I put her in a Radian last week (and like an idiot, didn't take pics before I sent the seat back:doh

and the seat fit around her body more closely than the Regent, because it's a more narrow, shorter seat.

I have a 47", 41lb 7yo who also rides in the Regent very comfortably.

I think it's a great seat for skinny kids, too.

lovinwaves · Sep 16, 2007

I personally will not be putting my kids in a Regent until they are MUCH older. My kids are peanuts, and I like a seat that "hugs" them and has deep sides. I like the Como because it seems to hug my kids on the sides, but not restrict them. They would be swallowed up by a Regent.

CDNTech · Sep 16, 2007

Here's my 5.5 year old DS in his Radian. He is 35lbs, 45in with a 16" torso...
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/148/429820337_ac5667fbae.jpg?v=0

He's still got close to two inches before he reaches the top slots. I prefer the Radian because it has a low profile/no base so he has a lot more head room in the vehicle.

Of the two you mentioned, I would go with the Como. That should easily last your daughter a looonnngg time.

LuvBug · Sep 16, 2007

the higher weight limit seats arent for obese kids, they are for harnessing kids past the minimums. The regent not only has a higher weight, but it has higher top slots.
My 4yo DS is too tall in the torso for the marathon now, so he is in a regent for the height... he weighs 40lbs and is 43" or so, so definitely not obese

just tall.

What seat is she currently using?

keri1292 · Sep 16, 2007

My dd is a little beanpole...stats in siggy...
Here she is in a Regent...

And in her brother's MA...

At this age, she's much better off in her Husky/Regent. She just started using it in April when the MA was starting to look more than snug in the shoulders. I also thought the Regent looks less like a "baby" seat than the MA. None of her friends are in anything more than a backless booster.

I really love the looks of the Como, but part of me feels like it looks too babyish for a girl like mine who would fit in it until about 9. Safety isn't about outward appearances, but I feel that she's quite safe in the Regent as well.

Mami · Sep 18, 2007

Thanks everyone for your replies. I just don't know why I can't get sold on the Regent... I do get that it can be used for tall children fine but it just seems that if there was an accident, it doesn't have any structure that would cushion the impact since her head would be so far from the sides of the seat. Does that make sense or am I over-thinking this?

When it comes to the Como or Signo I'm just a little concerned because when I've seen pics of kids in the Como it looked like some kids who were my daughter's height had the tops of their heads even with the shell already. How can that last a long time...?

Ugh, I wish the Signo would come out already so at least I would have a full grasp of my options.

Victorious4 · Sep 18, 2007

As soon as my daughter could no longer ride RF, she preferred the Husky/Regent because of the seat depth for added leg support + the seat width so she could cross her legs, etc....

@ the beginning of 4 years old she was about 43" 33#
@ the end of 4 years old she was about 45" 35#

rebeccah5 · Sep 18, 2007

papooses said:
As soon as my daughter could no longer ride RF, she preferred the Husky/Regent because of the seat depth for added leg support + the seat width so she could cross her legs, etc....

:yeahthat: My DD is 4.5 and is not overweight for her age but is on the tall side and she fits great in her Regent. She likes to cross her legs or prop up her feet frog-style and she has plenty of room for that. If you are putting it in a small car, I wouldn't really recommend it as it takes up half of the rear bench in my Town&Country and would swallow DS's Civic.

We tried DD in a Radian but I ended up taking it back. While it held her in more securely, the hips were so narrow I was afraid it would be uncomfortable for her long-term. Also the added height of the Regent was a plus for us, as I didn't think she'd get many years out of the Radian. HTH!

Regent apporpriate for a skinny, tall child...?

Mami

New member

CrabbyBunchX3

New member

jennsmile

New member

ZephyrBlue

New member

lovinwaves

New member

CDNTech

Senior Community Member

LuvBug

New member

keri1292

Well-known member

Mami

New member

Victorious4

Senior Community Member

rebeccah5

New member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics