Question leg bar vs anti-rebound system?

lourdes

Well-known member
Ok so I was reading some information that the car seat lady posted on Facebook and I got confused. She was talking about 2 seats that are available in the US that have the leg bar and about its benefits but it also talks about the difference and that's when I got confused. Which is better and what is the difference between one or the other???
 
ADS

_juune

New member
A support or load leg prevents the downward rotation of the seat. Crash test videos: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_Cht2vkxZw"]without a leg[/ame] -- note how the seat first moves forward and downward, becoming almost horizontal, [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x3KaPwZBXI"]with a leg[/ame] -- the seat stays much more upright [the seat is Euro Aton 2 with an isofix base].
After the seat has moved forward/downward, it moves back up towards the seatback -- that's the rebound. Anti rebound system might be an anti-rebound bar on the seat's base, seat's handle requiring "up" position in car, bolsters on the seat where it's pressing against the seatback, or tethers [not on infant seats]. It's mean to lessen the upward movement so that the child seat doesn't slam into the seatback.

[Added] Ugh, why does it automatically embed videos into the post? :/
 

cowgirlsmommy

New member
A support or load leg prevents the downward rotation of the seat. Crash test videos: Video Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_Cht2vkxZw -- note how the seat first moves forward and downward, becoming almost horizontal, Video Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x3KaPwZBXI -- the seat stays much more upright [the seat is Euro Aton 2 with an isofix base].
After the seat has moved forward/downward, it moves back up towards the seatback -- that's the rebound. Anti rebound system might be an anti-rebound bar on the seat's base, seat's handle requiring "up" position in car, bolsters on the seat where it's pressing against the seatback, or tethers [not on infant seats]. It's mean to lessen the upward movement so that the child seat doesn't slam into the seatback.

[Added] Ugh, why does it automatically embed videos into the post? :/

Just wanted to add the nuna pipa has the stability leg and also has anti rebound bolsters
 

MotoMommaNH

New member
I would dare to speculate that the load leg is a better system than anti rebound and this is why: the very first part of the crash is the seat moving forward - the belts stretch, the seat pushes down into the cushion, then eventually is stopped. The second part is the child then colliding into the seat back and harness (when rising up seat slightly) then stops. The key to reducing injury is to reduce the amount of ride down time that the child experiences in a crash (when their crash into the seat ends). The load leg is really great at doing that because its a stiff piece of metal and plastic attached directly to the base/seat vs the latch strap or seat belt only.
On the other end of the crash (the rebound) you have to think of your high school physics - every action has an equal and opposite reaction. So therefore if the initial action of going forward is diminished greatly by a load leg, then you can see how much that would reduce rebound already without any tethers, bolsters or anti rebound bars.
 

lourdes

Well-known member
Ok so in my opinion what I am getting from this is that just RF is not enough. With this I don't want to get attack. I feel frustrated because I learn here that RF is safer, that anti-rebound system is better than RF alone and now there's another system that is better and in my opinion is not even a possibility because those new seats that have the system are infant seat so if I want to go with the safest choice I have to buy a non US seat. And for me this is more frustrating because we already got 2 seats with anti-rebound system and we got them because of the anti-rebound system.....
Ok that was my vent...
 

aeormsby

New member
I would dare to speculate that the load leg is a better system than anti rebound and this is why: the very first part of the crash is the seat moving forward - the belts stretch, the seat pushes down into the cushion, then eventually is stopped. The second part is the child then colliding into the seat back and harness (when rising up seat slightly) then stops. The key to reducing injury is to reduce the amount of ride down time that the child experiences in a crash (when their crash into the seat ends). The load leg is really great at doing that because its a stiff piece of metal and plastic attached directly to the base/seat vs the latch strap or seat belt only.
On the other end of the crash (the rebound) you have to think of your high school physics - every action has an equal and opposite reaction. So therefore if the initial action of going forward is diminished greatly by a load leg, then you can see how much that would reduce rebound already without any tethers, bolsters or anti rebound bars.

I agree.

And I know some people prefer not to tether seats with newborns because stopping the rebound can be looked at similarly to FF dynamics. (having the seat move with the child the entire time putting less force on the neck - the forces are much smaller but on a fragile newborn I'd want to keep the seat moving with the baby as much as possible)

So I think the load leg on an infant seat which will be more likely for newborns makes more sense than anti-rebound ability. And if the load leg is limiting the amount of forward rotation the seat shouldn't be rebounding as much anyway because it doesn't have as much distance to spring back from.

Overall - it's not something I would get to nit-picky about for one being safer than another. RF is already such a safe way for kids to travel compared to FF.
 

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
Ok so in my opinion what I am getting from this is that just RF is not enough. With this I don't want to get attack. I feel frustrated because I learn here that RF is safer, that anti-rebound system is better than RF alone and now there's another system that is better and in my opinion is not even a possibility because those new seats that have the system are infant seat so if I want to go with the safest choice I have to buy a non US seat. And for me this is more frustrating because we already got 2 seats with anti-rebound system and we got them because of the anti-rebound system.....
Ok that was my vent...

Think of it like this, too... seats MUST pass the downward rotation part of the crash test with just a lap belt. There's not really a need for a load leg since the seat must NOT fall backward far enough for your kid to dump out backwards. http://www.carseat.org/Technical/tech_update.htm#angleRF Also, there's front seatbacks. Crash tests never show the fact that the front seatbacks will in fact be there preventing the carseat from dumping down. So load legs are nice to have, but technically you are going to be just fine without one. Anti Rebound is good for heavier toddlers in severe rear impacts.http://www.carseat.org/Technical/tech_update.htm#toptetherRF There's not really much data to show they are necessary, either, but I way, way prefer that for my kids over a seat without rear protection (Britax and Diono and Peg Perego and Combi have the straps, while the True Fit has a bar against the seatback, and the NextFit and SureRide are built to Canadian standards, with the foot area of the seat so high on the seatback that rebound is minimzed without the need to dig around for a place to tie a tether connector strap).
 

lourdes

Well-known member
I agree.

And I know some people prefer not to tether seats with newborns because stopping the rebound can be looked at similarly to FF dynamics. (having the seat move with the child the entire time putting less force on the neck - the forces are much smaller but on a fragile newborn I'd want to keep the seat moving with the baby as much as possible)

So I think the load leg on an infant seat which will be more likely for newborns makes more sense than anti-rebound ability. And if the load leg is limiting the amount of forward rotation the seat shouldn't be rebounding as much anyway because it doesn't have as much distance to spring back from.

Overall - it's not something I would get to nit-picky about for one being safer than another. RF is already such a safe way for kids to travel compared to FF.

So does this means it is safer to use my TFP without the anti-rebound bar for a newborn infant?
 

ketchupqueen

CPST and ketchup snob
Staff member
So does this means it is safer to use my TFP without the anti-rebound bar for a newborn infant?

No. The ARB is required.

The ARB is an alternative to the tether that seemingly may be a "best of both worlds" in that it reduces rebound without increasing neck loads as much.

I'm personally fine with either one for a newborn. Different people draw their lines different places. It all passes testing.
 

lourdes

Well-known member
No. The ARB is required.

The ARB is an alternative to the tether that seemingly may be a "best of both worlds" in that it reduces rebound without increasing neck loads as much.

I'm personally fine with either one for a newborn. Different people draw their lines different places. It all passes testing.

I am due in March and I was planning on using the TFP with the newborn because I am not working but I started to second guessing my self...
 

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Forum statistics

Threads
219,656
Messages
2,196,897
Members
13,530
Latest member
onehitko860

You must read your carseat and vehicle owner’s manual and understand any relevant state laws. These are the rules you must follow to restrain your children safely. All opinions at Car-Seat.Org are those of the individual author for informational purposes only, and do not necessarily reflect any policy or position of Carseat Media LLC. Car-Seat.Org makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis. If you are unsure about information provided to you, please visit a local certified technician. Before posting or using our website you must read and agree to our TERMS.

Graco is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org! Britax is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org! Nuna Baby is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org!

Please  Support Car-Seat.Org  with your purchases of infant, convertible, combination and boosters seats from our premier sponsors above.
Shop travel systems, strollers and baby gear from Britax, Chicco, Clek, Combi, Evenflo, First Years, Graco, Maxi-Cosi, Nuna, Safety 1st, Diono & more! ©2001-2022 Carseat Media LLC

Top