I didn't realize this discussion was moved into a separate thread. I chose to no subscribe since I though some answers were out of line. Overall I think the fierce discussion about HWH vs. BPB is stupid. Yes, the leading car sets experts over here prefer BPB's instead of HWH. This is because of the incredible force on a child's neck in a crash. But the safety difference isn't huge and we should not be focusing on this debate. We should be focusing first of all on kids being restrained in cars. And second, we should be focusing on rear facing. It's 5 times safer to rf a 12 month old compared to ffing. That's HUGE.
Also, since senior members can't stop obsessing (IMHO) about HWH, there are other factors regarding BPB's that contribute to good safety. Cheaper price tag, easier install, easy car seat choices, and easy to move seat to mention a few. It's kind of like front seat installs for rear facing kids, which some mock and think are unsafe since they don't know what they're talking about. Pure crash test safety is not as good but there are other factors which contribute to good safety.
Lets do this tread and then focus on rfing, I don't understand the obsession with HWH vs. BPB's:twocents:
AdventureDad, do you have anything that those of us who are genuinely interested in BPB vs. harnesses for our older kids can read on this subject?
I've repeatedly asked, or actually BEGGED, my friend at the crash test facility about this. He says there are no public data and won't be any either. Both methods are safe and there will be no comparisons since it's too expensive and also too many subjective factors must be used. It's impossible to determine what's going to be important in a head to head test. Also, all testing is classified and he can not legally tell me how seats compare to each other. He's only allowed to say "pass or fail". He can say things to me of the record but that's another story and might put him in trouble. What he says is, "
In my experience, and this goes for other experts here as well, we recommend BPB ahead of HWH seats due to the incredible load on the neck at impact. In a HWH the force is absorbed by the neck, in a BPB it's spread out over the whole body". As you can hear, there is lots of room for subjective opinions here. These guys have been doing this since the early 1960's and seen far more than anyone else. The Swedes take car seat safety far more seriously than any other nation. I sat rear facing in a car seat in 1967, that should say something. These opinions about BPB and HWH are subjective but I do trust them. The experts also have tremendous safety record to rely on. Injuries and deaths using BPB's are incredibly rare here, if there was a problem it would show in the stats.
Doesn't exist. Hence the debate.
You're entirely correct. To believe what the experts are saying you must trust them a little bit. But these guys have been keeping kids far safer than any other nation for the past 50 years. I would say that's a good thing but people here obsiouly disagree. They've pioneered rfing, everyone was laughing at them for many years, and are very serious about car seat safety. I feel very good trusting these people since they have a proven safety record that is incredible. I understand if others don't want to do this and instead go by those youtube videos, that's also fine.
Can you explain what it is that makes Swedish vehicles different from american vehicles?
We use about the same cars as you do. You are using some more suv's although I think we've been catching up somewhat. Having older kids, who are not in a car set, in the front seat is not a good idea. Having rear facing kids in the front is as safe as the rear. Doesn't matter if you're in Sweden , US, or Germany. Experts here say so, Volvo says so, and all Swedish car seats have instruction for front set installs. Pure crash test safety is slightly better in the rear but there are other factors which make the front a good choice. Better communication between driver and child. No looking around for pacifier or safety blanket. More flexible options for placement of seats. since the front is used, it's more likely other kids riding in the car are sitting properly (or using a car seat at all). Longer rear facing is an important factor. Parents often turn ff too soon since kids legs are bent and many believe this is dangerous/uncomfortable. Using front seat means parents keep their kids rear facing MUCH longer which is as you all know is a huge safety benefit.
Again, maybe Swedish vehicles have some sort of extra reinforcement in the dash area that lowers this risk?
No
it's fine to recommend what is normal practice in Sweden to people who live in areas that have the same circumstances as you. It's not ok to poo-poo what all of the highly experienced techs are saying about front seat being unsafe for rf'ing children & not being recommended here in North America
Point taken. But it's also not recommended because their is no data in US. Our seats not magic seats. A 2-year old sitting in a Marathon or a Britax Hi-Way are as safe IMHO. The Swedish seats are sfer since you can rar face until 5-ish instead of 2-3. There would be no or very little difference in the front seat. Being an experienced tech is one thing, being an experienced car seat researcher hanging out in the lab with cars and cars seats for 30+ years is just a few levels above that. No offense. It's like being a recreational tennis player of being on the tour. Parents are scared to deaths about airbags even though deaths are incredibly rare for kids. I'm not "poo-pooing" anyone but I think it's pointless people make absurd statements about rfing children in front sets when they clearly know almost nothing about it. We have similar airbags as every other country and simply disable them. There is a chance it could explode in a crash or during a rescue but all data suggest this is incredibly rare. There is also a chance the global financial crisis could be over tomorrow. Both are very unlikely IMHO and I'm staying long bear funds for quite a while longer.
An 8 yo's head is heavier, but *proportionately* much smaller than a younger child's. Since we (and Australia and Canada and the EU) know that kids 1-4 are very safe in harnesses FF, then Sweden had better come up with some better data insisting that this 'heavy head' notion is so dangerous, when we know that 5 pt harnesses are the standard for racecar drivers (and while they do have a HANS device to hold the head back, they are also going MUCH higher speeds than we do, and 5 pt harnesses have been a good safety standard for them for a long time).
Experts are not saying only head is heavier, they are saying virtually all the force is being absorbed by the neck muscles. Neck muscles which are far from developed. You're given the example of a 8-year old which I don't think is relevant since there are so incredibly few 8-year olds sitting in HWH. I know some on this board do but few others. Race car drivers are not 8 years old and their neck muscles are fully developed. They usually also use extra devices to keep the neck safe. I don't personally think the comparison is relevant because of the age difference.
I'm sorry, but is there a back story to this thread?
I guess not
I got some PM's talking about it and didn't even know the post was split. I had already left this discussion. I blame my constant ramblings on too much wine. Maybe we should put a 140 character limit on all posts........ Like a text message
I think the deal is that European cars allow the user to disable the airbags with a key the same way only 2-sitter cars allow in the US. It's not just a sensor, it turns it off and must have been proven to be safe. I agree that it would be irresponsible to suggest that anyone in the US try RFing in the front seat, but I dont think adventuredad is saying that.
Good point. I would personally never trust a sensor. But a switch or key is beyond extremely safe. An airbag could explode at any time. But so could your car. I think there are more important things to focus on. Like rfing longer.
I wasn't planning on starting a debate. But I still stand by my point that it makes no sense to turn a 2yo FF just so they could still be in a harness by 6yo and I wanted the OP to know that before she made a decision
Great point. Parents clearly don't know what's important regarding safety. The difference between BPB and HWH is small. The difference between rfing and ffing at 2 years of age is HUGE. Still, parents focus a hundred times more on the HWH vs. BPB issue.
Actually, the knowledge that kids are not safe in the front seat predates airbags by over a decade. The reason the front seat is not safe (for anyone really, but especially kids) is that the most common type of crash is frontal. Sitting in the back seat puts passengers further from the most likely point of impact.
You're right and wrong. Pure crash test safety is better in the rear seat for rfing kids. But as mentioned previosuly in this post, there are many other factors which make front seat install a idea
when looking at all the factors Which I think is a good idea. We are concerned about overall car seat safety aren't we? No only how things work in a lab.
I also think that any information we have about the front seat being more dangerous than the back seat is strictly related to FF passengers.
YES! Having an child, who is past rfing, ride in the front seat is far more dangerous and definitely not recommended here. But people of course incorrectly believe the same rules apply to both.
And, most of all, I think the largest issue at hand is the lack of proper carseat usage overall. Sweden seems to have all around decent carseat usage, which we (US--I can't speak for Canada) don't.
YES! Too many kids die in US. Not because they are in a BPB or ffing, because they are not restrained at all.
maybe, but the swedes seem to be arguing that the absolute weight of the adult sized head is what makes it so dangerous to harness...so...hmmm...
Most of the kids using HWH harness are not 10 years old. Kids develop their bones etc. as they grow older and I totally agree a 8-year old is far ahead of a 5-year old. The head is proportionally smaller but we're still talking about children. Experts here are saying it's a terrible idea to ff an child which is 1-4 years old due to the weak bones/muscles. The advice about HWH and BPB is very different. The experts
recommend BPB ahead of HWH due to the enormous load on the neck but the difference isn't even on the same planet as talking about ff and rf for a 2 year old. If someone wants to use a HWH for their 5 year old, that's perfetly fine and safe. Someone ffing their 18 month old kid is not fine.
Which brings me back to the beginning of this post. Discussing HWH and BPB is completely meaningless since the difference, if any, is small. We will save far more lives focusing on having parents use ANY restraint for their kids. And we will save even more lives by pushing for rfing for as long as possible. And as long as possible does not mean 2 years old.......
