What do you think--definitely outgrown, right?

An Aurora · Nov 1, 2007

I've "heard" (not on this board) that it was impossible for a child to outgrow the big Britax convertibles by height instead of weight. Just for fun, I put my older DD in baby sister's Marathon: (don't mind the attire, she was tired and cranky after a fun night trick-or-treating)

She's not exceptionally tall--75th percentile--but she does have quite a long torso. She is 28 months (today!!), 27 pounds, 36 inches.

skaterbabs · Nov 1, 2007

*I* would not consider that outgrown.

crunchierthanthou · Nov 1, 2007

skaterbabscpst said:
*I* would not consider that outgrown.

neither would I, but she is much closer than my nearly three year old.

spokaneCPST · Nov 1, 2007

Me either. Britax (at least my Marathon's manual) says RF is outgrown when the top of the head is even with the top of the seat. She still has a couple of inches it looks like in the first picture. she may grow that much before she gains 6 pounds, or maybe not.
Renee

MomToEliEm · Nov 1, 2007

When determining where to measure to see if a seat is outgrown, are you suppose to look at a horizontal line level with the top of the shell or a line perpendicular to the seat back?

If it is relative to the seat back, then I say the seat isn't outgrown yet. If it is following a horizontal line from the tallest part of the seat then it might be outgrown. I think if you follow the horizontal line policy, it would be very dependent on how far back the seat was reclined. The further up the seat was installed, the longer it could be used as the head would fall further down below that horizontal line.

An Aurora · Nov 1, 2007

So you guys are taking the "top of the head even with the top of the shell" to mean the back of the head, where it meets the shell of the seat? I interpreted it as "the head being totally encased by the shell" which it is not.

Victorious4 · Nov 1, 2007

I would let the parent decide but encourage them to call Britax for clarification -- I think I, too, take the meaning as "fully encased" but that description/explanation has be a little more confuzzled than I may have been already

An Aurora · Nov 1, 2007

Yes, as her parent I don't feel comfortable with her RFing in this seat. I will call Britax for clarification though.

canadianmom2three · Nov 1, 2007

She could probably still rf in her Radian though...would be interesting to see comparison pics, I always thought it was so much taller.

An Aurora · Nov 1, 2007

Yes she is still RF in her Radian with another 4" of room (this pic is 3 months old but she still has loads of room):

CDNTech · Nov 1, 2007

I would call that time to move seats.

I take it as the head needing to be fully encased in the shell. It looks like the top of her head is right at the top of the shell (within 1/2 inch anyway). If the seat were installed more upright, she would have more room in the seat though.

My 5.5 year old is 45" tall... he just fits in a RFing Radian when trying it out for fun. His head is well over the top of the Marathon though, seriously, I think his neck is even with the top of the shell on the Marathon.

The Radian provides way more RFing room.

EDITED: I stand corrected... it's interesting to see the different responses in what's considered outgrown. After seeing all the comments and information presented, I agree with the majority that she has time left in the seat. I love this board... always learning new things!

An Aurora · Nov 1, 2007

Yes I'm not sure about the angle of the MA, but it's installed for my 8mo so it's more reclined than it would be if DD1 was using it.

UlrikeDG · Nov 1, 2007

I would NOT call that outgrown. It can be hard to tell, because the angle of viewing changes the perspective, but the only picture that looks close is the last one.

"For rear-facing, the top of the child's head should be below the top of the shell, and a margin of at least an inch is recommended, so that the head will be supported and contact with the vehicle minimized during a severe crash."

There's also a discussion of it here: Why Rear-Facing is Safest (scroll down to the section titled "Rear Facing Height Limits."

The child in these photos would have to "ramp up" quite a bit for her head to actually exit the top of the seat shell.

scatterbunny · Nov 1, 2007

I agree with Ulrike, it only looks outgrown RF in the last photo.

soygurl · Nov 1, 2007

Momto2BabyGirls said:
Yes she is still RF in her Radian with another 4" of room ...

But in the pictures you posted in the OP, the Radian is FF...? Not to judge or anything, just to clarify that PP. :thumbsup:

And totally OT, but how do you pronounce your DD's name Mali? That's my niece's middle name, but I have a hunch it's pronounced differently...

An Aurora · Nov 1, 2007

So you're saying this:

Instead of this:

Right?

Jewels · Nov 1, 2007

scatterbunny said:
I agree with Ulrike, it only looks outgrown RF in the last photo.

I agree with them!

I think it is just the different angle. My ds is FF and I have taken pictures of him from the front and thought "oh my, he is huge! His head is at the top of the seat" when really it isn't it is just the angle. His head from the side looks similar to the side photos of your dd so I am thinking it is just the angle of the picture.

An Aurora · Nov 1, 2007

soygurl said:
But in the pictures you posted in the OP, the Radian is FF...? Not to judge or anything, just to clarify that PP. :thumbsup:

And totally OT, but how do you pronounce your DD's name Mali? That's my niece's middle name, but I have a hunch it's pronounced differently...

Oh DUH I was wondering why everyone was saying she could still be RF! I was just playing with the Radian FF, cause I'm weird like that

. The kids think it's great fun to go out to the car and play while mommy plays with car seats

Mali's name is pronounced just like "Molly."

and I've never met or heard of anyone else with that name, so it's nice to hear of someone else!

joolsplus3 · Nov 1, 2007

Looks like heaps of growing room to me... you go by that first little drawing, not with her forehead being even with the top of the seatback. Heck my manual says tops of ears even with the top of the seatback, even for RF, that would look like this http://www.cpsafety.com/articles/RFAlbum/Kendra.aspx (not my kid, she's not that big yet)
Peruse the whole album, it might give you more to compare your own kiddo with (all the seats are used right, except for one really over reclined kid, and that's clearly noted) http://www.cpsafety.com/articles/RFAlbum.aspx

An Aurora · Nov 1, 2007

Jewels said:
I agree with them!

I think it is just the different angle. My ds is FF and I have taken pictures of him from the front and thought "oh my, he is huge! His head is at the top of the seat" when really it isn't it is just the angle. His head from the side looks similar to the side photos of your dd so I am thinking it is just the angle of the picture.

I was trying to take pictures from right next to her head, so it wouldn't skew the perception. I agree though, different angles make a big difference!

What do you think--definitely outgrown, right?

Senior Community Member

Well-known member

New member

CPST Instructor

Moderator

Senior Community Member

Senior Community Member

Senior Community Member

Active member

Senior Community Member

Senior Community Member

Senior Community Member

Admin - CPS Technician Emeritus

New member

Active member

Senior Community Member

Senior Community Member

Senior Community Member

Admin - CPS Technician

Senior Community Member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics