Frontier vs Nautilus fit & install questions

bubbaray · Dec 29, 2008

OK, I tried over in the installation forum, but people are looking at my post and not replying? http://www.car-seat.org/showthread.php?t=68008

We just came back from a baby store (ugh, TJs) and tried out the GN and the FR in DH's '97 Pathfinder. No install problems with either seat, though he was happier with the FR install.

However, he was not happy with how DD#1 sat/fit in the FR. The seat of the FR slopes and that made her legs stick out somewhat towards the front driver's seat. He was worried that this would be problematic in a crash. His Pathfinder d/n have a lot of "leg" room between the seat and the driver's seat. Both the FR and the GN fit completely on the vehicle seat, no overhang. DD#1 fit very nicely in the GN.

We ended up putting a deposit on the GN (its sold out at TJs, but it *is* cheaper ($214.95) than at Sears.ca ($239.95) or BRU.ca ($229.95)). I would still prefer the FR (it has a longer expiry period and has SIP -- DH's vehicle d/n have side airbags). The FR is $299.99. For this particular seat, I'm only purchasing it at TJs b/c I have a $100GC there that expires in a couple of months.

DH is not sold on the need for SIP, especially as he plans on getting a new vehicle probably in 2009 (likely a Dodge crew cab truck).

Did we do the right thing? Is the fit important on a harnessed seat?? We won't be using the seat as a booster. Once DD#1 is out of either of these seats in harnessed mode, we'll get her a dedicated booster and pass along the GN/FR to DD#2.

TIA

QuassEE · Dec 29, 2008

I'm not sold on SIP being the be-all and end-all of child passenger safety, personally... Most collisions are frontal collisions...we know that. And that's what we're protecting against...but even side impact collisions will generally result in some sort of forward movement of the child (out of the child restraint for FF) resulting in a forward-facing child not having full SIP in such a collision. RF children probably do somewhat better with SIP, but have greater protection from the shell regardless of SIP or none. Compartment intrusion is rare in most collisions, and properly restrained children shouldn't have enough movement-ability to strike the B-pilar (which is beyond what SIP would protect against, anyways.)

Properly restrained children in a properly utilized and installed restraint are the safest children on the road. SIP, especially in an SUV that is already higher than many of the vehicles on the road, is a feature but not a necessity.

IMO, the biggest benefit of SIP is the additional sleep support it provides. Totally my opinion, here... I'm not saying SIP can't be of some benefit, but as compared to everything else it really doesn't factor in for me.

-N.

bubbaray · Dec 29, 2008

What about the fit issue -- is it safer for DD#1's legs to be nicely bent, as opposed to sticking somewhat straight out towards the front seat??

QuassEE · Dec 29, 2008

I guess I didn't address that, oops..

Well.. I don't really worry too much about legs in harnessed seats. Leg fit is a criteria for seatbelt use, and even factors in with boosters because boostered children will often move out of position if their legs don't bend comfortably at the seat edge. In a harnessed seat, however..their movements are limited. So I suspect there's no real issue beyond comfort. There is some small risk of a driver's seat collapsing--which is why most Americans recommend using your passenger side before your driver's side (driver's seat is always occupied, passenger seat is less occupied).. I don't make that recommendation in the Lower Mainland because of the lack of advanced green left turn signals.

I would say...whatever is more comfortable for the child in this case.. Some kids will just cross their legs when they don't bend nicely or curve in a restraint. The Regent is a great example of this--it's too long for younger kids' legs, and so most kids just cross their legs in the restraint. It's also another seat that pushes a child towards the front seatback.

As far as safety goes--we're really protecting head/neck/brain/spinal cord, first.. Major organs are the next concern. Limbs aren't really as much of a consideration, since they can be easily repaired. Morbid, I realize.

-Nicole.

bubbaray · Dec 29, 2008

Thanks! I just talked to DH again and he's still hung up on the comfort aspect. She was not sitting at 90degrees in the FR, so he thought it wouldn't be comfortable for longer road trips. I have to say, if it were me, I would have found the FR quite uncomfy with the slope of the seat bottom.

Oh well, the GN was cheaper anyway. At least I steered DH and DD#1 away from the pink Monterey that he wanted to get her, LOL.

Anyone purchased a pink cover set from Graco for the GN???

canadiangie · Dec 29, 2008

QuassEE said:
I guess I didn't address that, oops..

Well.. I don't really worry too much about legs in harnessed seats. Leg fit is a criteria for seatbelt use, and even factors in with boosters because boostered children will often move out of position if their legs don't bend comfortably at the seat edge. In a harnessed seat, however..their movements are limited. So I suspect there's no real issue beyond comfort. There is some small risk of a driver's seat collapsing--which is why most Americans recommend using your passenger side before your driver's side (driver's seat is always occupied, passenger seat is less occupied).. I don't make that recommendation in the Lower Mainland because of the lack of advanced green left turn signals.
I would say...whatever is more comfortable for the child in this case.. Some kids will just cross their legs when they don't bend nicely or curve in a restraint. The Regent is a great example of this--it's too long for younger kids' legs, and so most kids just cross their legs in the restraint. It's also another seat that pushes a child towards the front seatback.

As far as safety goes--we're really protecting head/neck/brain/spinal cord, first.. Major organs are the next concern. Limbs aren't really as much of a consideration, since they can be easily repaired. Morbid, I realize.

-Nicole.

OT...

That's so interesting to me Nicole. YEARS ago I sat through a course that talked specifically about this. The idea being that if your area/region/city/town/whatever has a high number of solid greens rather than advanced turning arrows you *might* want to opt for the driver's side if the middle seating position isn't an option. Specifically, YEARS ago (not sure now) Lethbridge was a city that had a higher number of side impact collisions occur on the passenger side... due to a high number of solid green intersection situations. I can remember mentioning this to parents/caregivers for a while. I even installed my nieces seat on the driver's side way back about 7yrs ago (Lethbridge).

Anyway, basically your post just walked me down memory lane, and I wanted to mention it.

NSmom · Dec 29, 2008

How did your DD fit in the FR vs the GN height wise? We have FRs but I am curious as to how much more room the GN would give for torso growth, if any?

scatterbunny · Dec 29, 2008

NSmom said:
How did your DD fit in the FR vs the GN height wise? We have FRs but I am curious as to how much more room the GN would give for torso growth, if any?

They are virtually identical on top slot height. My daughter was an inch over the top slots on both seats when I tried her in them on the same day last summer, when she was about 52 inches tall.

bubbaray · Dec 29, 2008

NSmom said:
How did your DD fit in the FR vs the GN height wise? We have FRs but I am curious as to how much more room the GN would give for torso growth, if any?

My DD#1 had more room in the FR as far as I could tell, particularly if I were planning on using it as a booster (I'm not, we'll get a dedicated HBB and pass the GN/FR to DD#2). I didn't actually thread the harness to her height on either seat, though. I've read here that the GN has a touch more room in the harness once you actually put it to the right setting.

scatterbunny · Dec 29, 2008

Had to search for it, but here's a thread comparing how two different children fit the Nautilus, Frontier, and Regent.

bubbaray · Dec 29, 2008

QuassEE said:
I don't make that recommendation in the Lower Mainland because of the lack of advanced green left turn signals.

I was told by a forensic engineer about 15 years ago that more fatalities occur on the passenger side of the vehicle vs the driver's side b/c the driver has the "instinct" to save themselves in a crash. As in, when faced with an imminent crash, the driver will swerve so that the impact is not on the driver's side of the vehicle. I have been royally roasted for stating that in the past, but the guy was/is an internationally recognized expert in crash physics/engineering.... I'm not saying the stats bear that out with respect to car seats, that wasn't the discussion I was having with him.

My DH (also an engineer, not forensic though) says that our ICBC rates would plumett if left hand turns were illegal in the Lower Mainland -- either advance lefts or right hand turns only.

Of course, there is always the "really, how DID you get your license" type of driver that seems to dominate the streets here. Turns of any sort, heck even driving in a straight line, seems to be far too great a challenge for most of the drivers on the roads here. Sigh.

canmom · Dec 29, 2008

bubbaray said:
For this particular seat, I'm only purchasing it at TJs b/c I have a $100GC there that expires in a couple of months.

I just wanted to let you know that I am pretty sure the government has implemented that GC are not alowed to expire anymore. :thumbsup:

QuassEE · Dec 29, 2008

As if TJs would care?

canmom said:
I just wanted to let you know that I am pretty sure the government has implemented that GC are not alowed to expire anymore. :thumbsup:

bubbaray · Dec 29, 2008

canmom said:
I just wanted to let you know that I am pretty sure the government has implemented that GC are not alowed to expire anymore. :thumbsup:

Yeah, but TJs, is, well, TJs. They checked today and said that the ones they issue now don't expire, but when mine was purchased (March 2007), they did have a 2 year expiry. Frankly, I have had enough battles with TJs over the years. I would rather have purchased anywhere else, but $100 is $100, KWIM? I just want to get a seat (still not 100% sure I made the right choice -- AHHHHH) and be done with dealing with them.

I have to get another seat for DD#1 for my Ody, but either way will probably get it at BRU. I guess they'll have newer FRs once they get a new shipment from Britax. The FR I was going to buy at TJs today had an October 2008 DOM, which didn't thrill me.

NSmom · Dec 29, 2008

scatterbunny said:
They are virtually identical on top slot height. My daughter was an inch over the top slots on both seats when I tried her in them on the same day last summer, when she was about 52 inches tall.

bubbaray said:
My DD#1 had more room in the FR as far as I could tell, particularly if I were planning on using it as a booster (I'm not, we'll get a dedicated HBB and pass the GN/FR to DD#2). I didn't actually thread the harness to her height on either seat, though. I've read here that the GN has a touch more room in the harness once you actually put it to the right setting.

Thanks, I am glad to hear that they are the same, or at least have very little difference in the harness height.:thumbsup: Some places I have read it sounded like the GN was a fair bit higher. I was trying to wait for the GN for a second seat but got tired of waiting and got a second FR, and a few days later the GN became available! I was kind of kicking myself because I thought it might have given DD more room, now I am relieved!

bubbaray if you are looking for a FR with a new DOM try babyproofingplus.com, I got my second one there, the shipping was free, it got here within a week (during the xmas rush) and had a Dec 9/08 DOM, and I placed my order on Dec 15, so it was super new!

April · Dec 30, 2008

bubbaray said:
I was told by a forensic engineer about 15 years ago that more fatalities occur on the passenger side of the vehicle vs the driver's side b/c the driver has the "instinct" to save themselves in a crash. As in, when faced with an imminent crash, the driver will swerve so that the impact is not on the driver's side of the vehicle. I have been royally roasted for stating that in the past, but the guy was/is an internationally recognized expert in crash physics/engineering.... I'm not saying the stats bear that out with respect to car seats, that wasn't the discussion I was having with him.

My DH (also an engineer, not forensic though) says that our ICBC rates would plumett if left hand turns were illegal in the Lower Mainland -- either advance lefts or right hand turns only.

That was my thinking for the longest time, that the severity & frequency would be higher on the passenger side, maybe because of the way I see people taking left turns around here! But then a bunch of people on this board said they were equal, but then there was that study a few months ago saying that there was a measurable difference (can't find study now, I got a new pc). I just haven't been able to wrap my mind around how it could be close to equal, but like I said, maybe because I've lived in the lower mainland for the last 20 years? Nevertheless, I've always used the driver's side second row as the "first" spot I'll put a child if I'm only bringing one with me. It just feels safer to me.

And for the record, TJ's is horrid, IMO. If I got a $100 GC, I'd probably sell it on CL to avoid having to go in there and have them made rude comments about my children....:thumbsdown:

Frontier vs Nautilus fit & install questions

bubbaray

New member

QuassEE

Moderator - CPST Instructor

bubbaray

New member

QuassEE

Moderator - CPST Instructor

bubbaray

New member

canadiangie

New member

NSmom

New member

scatterbunny

New member

bubbaray

New member

scatterbunny

New member

bubbaray

New member

canmom

New member

QuassEE

Moderator - CPST Instructor

bubbaray

New member

NSmom

New member

April

Well-known member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics