Britax gives a response on FB

[Jennifer mom to my 7]

It's a bit of a false argument to jump from "Because parent's don't" to "Then Child Restraint manufacturers have no reason to". That simply isn't true.

Widespread potential must go before a paradigm shift. If the average Joe buys the safest seat (you know, a Britax), and it CAN'T get his kid rear facing beyond 2 years, he has no reason to believe that he should, nor is he likely to buy a different seat at that juncture. After all, if BRITAX doesn't believe it's important, why should he?

You'll forgive me for saying it, but the old-timers seem far more ready to defend Britax than some of us new-comers. Yeah, I've only been a technician for three years, but I've been a parent since 2004. I didn't have to deal with car seats in the late 90s the way some did, but I've never been a fan of comparative grading, anyhow.....or social promotion

Hey, Maedze, I have been a parent since 1991, and never a tech, and I am there with ya

But, we need education first. I really think we need to get Pediatricians to stop telling people that "oh, your 9 month old is over 20 pounds, it is perfectly safe to turn them forward facing" before the average parent will fight for longer lasting rear facing seats, kwim?

 

[Jennifer mom to my 7]

I disagree. Education and good seats, concurrently. You can't expect parents to follow even close to best practice if their seat won't allow it.

Oh, but we have good seats, they just aren't the new britax

 

[Maedze]

Hey, Maedze, I have been a parent since 1991, and never a tech, and I am there with ya

But, we need education first. I really think we need to get Pediatricians to stop telling people that "oh, your 9 month old is over 20 pounds, it is perfectly safe to turn them forward facing"[/I] before the average parent will fight for longer lasting rear facing seats, kwim?

Well, that guy needs to be sold for parts, that's for sure.

 

[SafeDad]

It's a bit of a false argument to jump from "Because parent's don't" to "Then Child Restraint manufacturers have no reason to". That simply isn't true.

Widespread potential must go before a paradigm shift. If the average Joe buys the safest seat (you know, a Britax), and it CAN'T get his kid rear facing beyond 2 years, he has no reason to believe that he should, nor is he likely to buy a different seat at that juncture. After all, if BRITAX doesn't believe it's important, why should he?

You are implying that Britax has the responsibility to be the trend setter here. Clearly, they are not. Sunshine Kids is. Britax made a compromise in their new seats. For some, those between 35-40 pounds and those who have limited installation room, the new seats will actually keep them rear-facing longer than the previous ones. For others with taller kids or those 40-45 pounds who wish to continue rear-facing, the Radian is a better choice. As I have said, I don't see a problem with having choice.

You'll forgive me for saying it, but the old-timers seem far more ready to defend Britax than some of us new-comers. Yeah, I've only been a technician for three years, but I've been a parent since 2004. I didn't have to deal with car seats in the late 90s the way some did, but I've never been a fan of comparative grading, anyhow.....or social promotion

I'm pretty sure that I have not defended Britax on this issue. In fact, I've pretty clearly stated in various threads (including this thread and my review) that I am disappointed that the shell is shorter on the new models than it was before.

What I am defending is the guidelines set by the AAP and Safe Kids USA, as well as those established in the curriculum for technicians. Based on that, I feel there are many covertibles carseats from various manufacturers that can keep kids quite safe, even if they do not have the rear-facing limits of the category leader.

 

[Maedze]

Oh, but we have good seats, they just aren't the new britax

Exactly. Which is (one of my many) point(s)....Britax missed the boat.

 

[ZephyrBlue]

Chiming in because I have one of the new Britax convertibles and have been using it long enough to know it's quirks, etc. No, it's not going to get most kids RF to 4. Maybe not till 3. BUT it's still a Britax; it's easy to use. Easier to install RF than the TF (which is pretty darn easy). The recline handle is soft, for lack of a better word. It's different from the old style, and I'm sure that some people are wishing that every feature stayed the same because that's what we were all used to. The harness adjuster is soooo nice. Old-style RA nice, which is such a nice change for the BV. And contrary to what some others think, I do not feel that the seat is at all insubstantial-feeling. I went to TRU to buy a Complete Air as a spare a couple weeks ago and just flat out couldn't do it. Stood there and tried to talk myself into it, but couldn't. It felt flimsy and cheap compared to our other seats- and very much so compared to the new BV 70, IMO. And my almost 1yo fits WAY better in it than in the TF (she flopped over to one side even though she has no muscle tone issues). People are going to buy it because it's Britax. And if people use it properly, it's going to keep their kids safe. And it's still easier to use than some of the other popular seats on the market now- I still hate the tabs on the Evenflo convertibles for people who aren't entirely sure where the straps should be. RF till 4 or beyond is the ideal, but that's just not where American parents are right now. I'm glad that Britax honed in on some of the FF safety details since MOST American parents are going to turn their kids between 1 and 2. :twocents:

 

[Maedze]

You are implying that Britax has the responsibility to be the trend setter here. Clearly, they are not. Sunshine Kids is. Britax made a compromise in their new seats. For some, those between 35-40 pounds and those who have limited installation room, the new seats will actually keep them rear-facing longer than the previous ones. For others with taller kids or those 40-45 pounds, the Radian is a better choice. As I have said, I don't see a problem with having choice.



I'm pretty sure that I have not defended Britax on this issue. In fact, I've pretty clearly stated in various threads (including this thread and my review) that I am disappointed that the shell is shorter on the new models than it was before.

What I am defending is the guidelines set by the AAP and Safe Kids USA, as well as those established in the curriculum for technicians. Based on that, I feel there are many covertibles carseats from various manufacturers that can keep kids quite safe, even if they do not have the rear-facing limits of the category leader.

I disagree that the Britax convertibles as they stand have anything to recommend them over anything else on the market.

Not much of a 'choice' when one won't work for even average kids and the trendsetter is incompatible in many cars. "Choice" exists when several items fulfill basic functional needs and the parent gets to choose from extra features.

The AAP's recommendation is that child restraint manufacturers design seats to keep children rear facing until 4 years. Britax didn't do that.

 

[Jennifer mom to my 7]

Well, that guy needs to be sold for parts, that's for sure.

True, but how many have come here with that story? I hear it all the time, here, and other boards. You know it is out there. Even certified technicians are spewing wrong info (like legs touching the back of the seat they need to flip, use both the harness and the seatbelt to train the kid, etc).

I think Evenflo, the makers of the crappiest infant seat on the planet, and the most dangerous, have made the best seats in the past 4 years, with the EFTA, and now the Triumph 65, and the maestro. Graco maybe 2nd with the myride and the nautilus.

I do think britax just hasn't gotten it, yet. They will, I think, though. They did fix the frontier.

 

[capeKO71]

I installed my first marathon 70 this week.

I will say this... it's going to be a tough seat for parents to install incorrectly. It is extremely easy to install and to use. The harness is super smooth and easy to adjust.

 

[a_js]

But, you are talking about a subaru, and on top of that, a forester! You need a crow bar to get any seat rf in that, and the old marathon did pretty okay, even if the passenger needs to eat a bit of dashboard.

Lose an inch of torso height in the new seats, and my dd wouldn't not have made it to the 25 months she did in the decathlon with the 33 pound limit. She would have lost the extra height the decathlon had. The myride should last at least as long in height as the older britax seats, so why by the new? if you lose height.


Of course, this is all an advocate argument, and not a true life argument, as Darren has stated. Yes, us advocates, who really liked the older britax seats, when that was all there was, were hoping great things out of the new ones, but we are very dissappointed. But Joe Shmoe will not be.

I had to LOL at the Subaru comment--it's so true. I hated our Forester for that reason. *nothing* fit nicely except the Britax seats.

My child outgrew the Marathon RF'ing comparatively early (33 lbs at 20 months). But if it had had a shorter shell, I wouldn't have been able to FF him in it much longer than RF him. He was out of it FF just before 4 years old. Granted, he has a long torso.

I do see the point that most American parents will FF by 2 years old, so more safety technology is a good thing for FF seats. I'm just disappointed that the height was actually lowered, because I think the vast majority of kids outgrow seats well before they hit the weight limits. And I feel like by emphasizing only the weight requirements, Britax is sending the message that weight is the important criteria, when that isn't the case. If a child is too tall to sit in a seat, they can't use it, it makes no difference how much they weigh. I mean, would anyone who knows a bit actually expect a 65 pound child to fit in a (new or old) Marathon? I'd be absolutely shocked if anyone provided me with evidence of that happening.

 

[jjordan]

I think it makes sense, from a marketing standpoint, that Britax made a seat that is relatively compact (front to back) when rearfacing. It seems to mesh well with the trend toward buying smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles. In the online forum world that we're all a part of, we have a skewed idea of how carseats should be made, compared to what sorts of carseats will SELL in the real world. I don't know what percentage of parents come to this forum (or seek similar expert advice elsewhere) before buying a carseat. But, based on what I see in cars (both seat selection and use), I'm guessing it's a pretty small number. Britax has clearly decided that they'll make more money with the seats they've made rather than the seats we wanted them to make.

 

[yetanotherjen]

I installed my first marathon 70 this week.

I will say this... it's going to be a tough seat for parents to install incorrectly. It is extremely easy to install and to use. The harness is super smooth and easy to adjust.

I agree, easiest install I have EVER done, ever. Except I can see it being difficult to achieve a newborn recline

 

[a_js]

I disagree that the Britax convertibles as they stand have anything to recommend them over anything else on the market.

Not much of a 'choice' when one won't work for even average kids and the trendsetter is incompatible in many cars. "Choice" exists when several items fulfill basic functional needs and the parent gets to choose from extra features.

The AAP's recommendation is that child restraint manufacturers design seats to keep children rear facing until 4 years. Britax didn't do that.

I think it was 2 years? I could be wrong.

In any case, I can absolutely agree it would have been nice to have choices. All the seats having a shorter shell is not a choice, IMO. And it's true, with taller shells, sometimes it is inconvenient and the front passenger has to be squished. So it's nice for those with extremely small cars to have another option. I know when we had our Roundabout the extra room was nice. However, we did end up having to get a Marathon anyway, so it wasn't terribly cost effective. And as a PP pointed out, very often an older baby doesn't need the seat reclined as much so the shell height isn't as big a deal as it would seem to be.

 

[Patriot201]

You'll forgive me for saying it, but the old-timers seem far more ready to defend Britax than some of us new-comers. Yeah, I've only been a technician for three years, but I've been a parent since 2004. I didn't have to deal with car seats in the late 90s the way some did, but I've never been a fan of comparative grading, anyhow.....or social promotion

I have been "dealing" with carseats since 1997, when the REALLY good convertibles got a (relatively small) child to age 1.5 RF. I went through an "interesting" group of seats in the late 1990s... Evenflo Medallion, Eddie Bauer OHS POC, Evenflo Ultara I, Evenflo Ultara V, Evenflo Secure Advantage, Century SmartMove, Century 1000(?), Evenflo On My Way, Century SmartFitPlus, Century Breverra, Graco Quest, Graco Snugride (one of the originals!), and so on...

In the late 1990s/very early 2000s, Britax was DEFINITELY at the top of the heap. It was, in my non-tech opinion, the greatest seat out there. I LOVED the Roundabout, the StarRiser Comfy, the King, and the baseless Handle with Care (the Freeway, Roadster, and others were not ones with which I had much experience). Britax was king.

Even into the mid-to-late 2000s, I was a huge Britax groupie. Huge. I owned my own Britax, convinced my siblings that Marathons were the only way to go, convinced my mom to buy a Boulevard for her car, convinced my parents to buy Regents for the older kids, and so on. I still thought Britax was great. Perhaps their "rank" had dropped to "prince" or "duke" in my eyes, but they were still earning respect from me.


Now...


It isn't that I have not lost respect for Britax, it is more that I have broadened my horizons and see that, for the children in my life and for the situations in which I need seats, Britax is not always the best choice. There is certainly nothing wrong with Britax. I do still like them. A lot. I just see that their seats are not the "be-all-and-end-all" that I once thought they were.

There are certain things that I REALLY do like about many of their seats. However, I see that, in some cases, there are better seats for the money/for the child/for the vehicle, and so on.



That's just where I stand on the "issue."

 

[SafeDad]

I disagree that the Britax convertibles as they stand have anything to recommend them over anything else on the market.

There we obviously do disgaree. I happen to think there are many convertibles that can be recommended to work well for a lot of parents and will keep their kids safe.

Not much of a 'choice' when one won't work for even average kids and the trendsetter is incompatible in many cars. "Choice" exists when several items fulfill basic functional needs and the parent gets to choose from extra features.

Clearly there is room for further improvement. Even so, today's child seats offer a lot of improvement overall compared to those of 5 years ago. Hopefully in another 5 years they will be even better with advocates driving manufacturers to improve.

The AAP's recommendation is that child restraint manufacturers design seats to keep children rear facing until 4 years. Britax didn't do that.

This is not the current guideline for parents and technicians. As for 4 years, perhaps a 50th percentile child at 48 months does fit in the new Britax seats? According to the 2000 CDC chart, that's 36 pounds and 40" tall if I read it correctly (for boys, a bit less for girls). That's about the size of BookMama's DD who is almost 5. LilypadMom's DD was even taller and heavier at about the same age and also fit. What height criteria did the AAP suggest for manufacturers?

 

[jjordan]

I disagree that the Britax convertibles as they stand have anything to recommend them over anything else on the market.

Not much of a 'choice' when one won't work for even average kids and the trendsetter is incompatible in many cars. "Choice" exists when several items fulfill basic functional needs and the parent gets to choose from extra features.

The AAP's recommendation is that child restraint manufacturers design seats to keep children rear facing until 4 years. Britax didn't do that.

Really? Nothing? Easy to install, easy to use, will fit rearfacing in a small car where other seats won't... That should vault them to the top of the list for many parents.

 

[mimieliza]

But, you are talking about a subaru, and on top of that, a forester! You need a crow bar to get any seat rf in that, and the old marathon did pretty okay, even if the passenger needs to eat a bit of dashboard.

Right, and do you know how many parents drive Subarus in my neck of the woods (Oregon)? I know MANY families who own Foresters/Imprezas and Marathons who were chomping at the bit to turn their 12-month-olds FFing because it was so darn uncomfortable/impractical to have them RFing. Sad, but true. And what's worse is, I CAN'T BLAME THEM! I hated that damn seat RFing (Blvd). And I HATED the EFTA RFing. I bought the seats that would provide the most RFing room available at the time, but I really, really disliked using them in that car. (FWIW, Radian was less widely available at that point, so I couldn't try it out in my car. Pretty sure it would have been a no go RFing.)

Seems people have the same problem with other small SUVs, especially models that are a few years old. Older Rav4, CRV, X3, etc. all seem to have teensy back seats. Yet, lots of people choose those vehicles because they are great to drive here in the mountains/bad weather, and they SEEM like great family cars with decent gas mileage.

The passenger eating the dashboard was me or DH - our children's mother or father. Putting MYSELF or DH at risk in case of a serious accident was not really an acceptable solution to me.

I'm looking forward to having my 39" nearly-four-year-old DD try out a new Britax RFing - curious to see if she fits. She could still RF in her old-style Blvd by height but outgrew it by weight (33 lbs) over a year ago.

 

[a_js]

Really? Nothing? Easy to install, easy to use, will fit rearfacing in a small car where other seats won't... That should vault them to the top of the list for many parents.

For those of you who have used both the new and old--I've put a Marathon RF in my Toyota Matrix, which is a compact car, and as long as it doesn't require a newborn (45d) recline, it's fine. Is reducing the shell height really a dealbreaker in most cars? In my car, with a more upright angle, it fits so that the front passenger is comfortable. Can't slide the seat all the way back, but enough so that anyone under 6' or so is okay.

I will agree that Britax had and apparently still has the Easiest Install award but paying nearly double for that feature? Ouch.

 

[Chely7425]

I think that for most of us on this board a seat with the easiest install isn't worth the Britax price tag... but for someone who isn't as into carseats? Yes, it is. One of my best friends is horrible with car seat installs but she CAN get a britax seat installed correctly every time. Her child is safe, she may turn her FF before 3-4 but IMHO while it isn't ideal, a 2 year old in a properly installed FF seat is way better than a 2 year old RF in an improperly installed seat. There are also some cars that the Britax style seats are the best fit in just based on the base and stuff.

 

[jjordan]

I actually think front-back space is a huge issue in the real world. We have two smallish cars (but not tiny), and even with our convertibles (old Britax) at an upright angle, the front seats can't be all the way back. Now, I'm short, so I don't really mind, plus even if I were taller I'd do it just because I want to keep my kids safe. Even dh, who's tall, was willing to have the seat a couple clicks forward when both kids were RF, because he knew it would keep me happy.

But, as far as I can tell, our experience is not representative of most people's experience. For one thing, most of the time they don't know that their seat can be installed at a more upright angle. And then there's the fact that they don't want to sit with their seat pushed up any longer than absolutely necessary, regardless of their height. So, for most parents who own mid-sized or smaller cars, that means they're turning their kid to forward facing as soon as they can because they "can't fit" a convertible rearfacing in their car.