car seats

U

Unregistered

Guest
Hi there, where can I find at he most recent and updated list of car seats which have passed the Swedish plus test
 
ADS

Adventuredad

New member
You can find a list here or se below. This is unfortunately in Swedish. I'm working on a complete site in English which will be at PlusTest.se but it will not be done for a while.

The Plus Test standard is quite interesting since it's by far the strictest car seat standard in the world. It's already difficult to pass rear facing up to 25 kg with the normal ECE R44 standard. No non-Swedish seats in the world has for example passed to 25 kg. Foreign seats doing the Plus Test usually end up in pieces on the the floor.

Plus Test is also using a very abusive crash pulse. The crash speed is much higher and the deceleration much shorter. The curve is therefore very steep which makes if far more violent. Curves for ECE R44 and FVMSS 213 are not nearly as steep. In addition to the tough crash pulse forces in a child's head are also measured.

If forces are above a certain limit then the seats don't pass. This is why forward facing or combination seats have no chance of passing. These seats might pass if measurement of forces in the dummies head were low. But forces in the head/neck of forward facing seat are instead incredibly large.

Forces for the P3 dummy must be below 1220 N and for the larger P6 dummy 1640 N. Those limits are very tough to pass which is exactly what we want. The forces are achieved by basically measuring how much the neck of the child stretches according to a certain SAE standard. One would not even want to know what those forces are for a forward facing child. Seriously scary.

Seats having passed to 25 kg (55 lbs):

Britax Hi-Way 2
Britax Max-Way
Besafe Izi Plus
Axkid Minikid
Akta/Graco Belogic (no longer sold)

Seats having passed to 18 kg (40 lbs):

Kiss 2/Duologic
Britax Max-Fix
Besafe Izikid X3 Isofix
Besafe Izikid X1, X2 and X3 (not really sold any longer)
 

Niniel

New member
Hi Adventuredad, can I ask if you know what foreign seats have gone through(and failed) the plus test?

Also, what is the speed and deceleration used?

Thanks :)
 

Adventuredad

New member
There is lots of testing going on which is never published or shown to consumers. Seats are constantly abused in various ways to learn more about them. People who are present during testing always sign a NDA. Talking about how seats perform in various situations to outsiders and consumers would be lots of fun but it's not possible. It would be especially entertaining to discuss foreign seats and the Plus Test.

Speed of the test is not of much importance. It's 56.5 km/h for the Plus Test. It's deceleration which is key and that's why the crash pulse for the Plus Test is so steep. A collision at 60 mph with a deceleration of 5 meters would be no problem. A collision at 20 mph with a deceleration of .25 meter is a huge problem with enormous forces.

One good example is testing for aircrafts where speed is high but deceleration is enormously long. This crash pulse is therefore both low and not steep at all. Car seats going through the regular ECE R44 testing might reach 35-40 G which is very high. Plus Test is far higher.

The actual passenger seats, not car seats, on aircraft used to be tested at 9G. It was raised after a UK accident 15+ years ago to 16 G. Car seats for an aircraft are also tested at this level. We have lots of data showing very clearly that car seats on aircrafts are irrelevant for safety. If every singly child in US would have used a car seat on board an aircraft the last 20 years we would not have saved a single life. (Source FAA). This has to do with the crash pulse.

We basically hit the ground at 400 MPH, like in France recently, and die instantly or the forces are very low. Like aborted landing, skidding on the runway, etc. Despite the speed of the aircraft being very high for a poor landning the deceleration is extremely long so the huge speed is not of much importance. It can scary but accidents are very rare.

During the last post I could not talk about two seats which have passed the Plus Test since the information was not public. We now have the brand new Besafe Izikid X1 and also Maxi Cosi Pearl XP approved for the Plus Test. These two seats are approved for thew new European R129 standard and therefore approved to 105 cm.

The X1 is a very nice improvement of the current Besafe i-Size model. It's far more compact, still has good recline and also adjustable leg space/anti-rebound bar.
 

Niniel

New member
Thanks for your reply. I thought ECE R44 testing only went up to 21 G, so that's good news.

Would you be able to tell me how much higher the Plus Test deceleration is?
 
Last edited:

Niniel

New member
Also, I'm wondering how true this is(I'm guessing not very, but I'd love to back my guess up with some facts:

The plus test isn't the be all and end all it only tests one specific thing, and no I'm not sure if any Australian restraints have been tested but our forward facing restraints perform exceptionally well regardless of the plus test. In the plus test there's a metal bar in front of the restraint at a certain distance and of the dummy touches the seat it fails, it's set at a certain length that basically ensures almost any forward facing restraint fails
 
Last edited:

Adventuredad

New member
Just for fun, please tell me where you heard your quoted description of the Plus Test? It's hysterically funny and incorrect :):):D:D:D

The correct value for G forces should be 26-30 G for R44 and around 40 G for the Plus Test. Sorry about the confusion, I blame it on the late night wine:)

You can basically take anything out of Australia regarding car seats and place it in the garbage. The rear facing limit is still in 2015 an incredibly low 12 kg (30.5 lbs). Such a fantastic country with well educated and super nice people. Really difficult to say anything negative except for the disaster with car seats. The AS 1754 is stone age and although it now finally allows Isofix it must be with top tether and no support leg is allowed. No point of even allowing Isofix with those conditions.

The Aussies allowance of FF at six months is also sad. All countries are trying, some more than others, to keep kids rear facing longer since it's so much safer but Australia goes the the opposite way.

Back to the Plus Test. This test is by far the toughest car seat standard in the world. Nothing even comes close. Not only is the crash pulse very steep but forces in head of the dummy are also measured. Those two factors together makes it very difficult for a seat to pass. The steep pulse is actually very tough on the seats. As mentioned earlier it's not so much the speed but the deceleration which is tough on the seats. You said:

Would you be able to tell me how much higher the Plus Test deceleration is?
Not sure what you mean with this question. Deceleration is not a particular value, it has to do with the pulse. A steep pulse is more abusive. It's more abusive to crash into a cement wall than a wall of rubber tires. The G forces are much higher. I have below enclosed the pulse for the Plus Test for reference.

The Plus Test is performed on the regular R44 sledge but the pulse is as mentioned different. To pass to 25 kg, 55 lbs, the P6 dummy is used. It's quite a big and heavy dummy to carry around.

The plus test isn't the be all and end all it only tests one specific thing, and no I'm not sure if any Australian restraints have been tested but our forward facing restraints perform exceptionally well regardless of the plus test. In the plus test there's a metal bar in front of the restraint at a certain distance and of the dummy touches the seat it fails, it's set at a certain length that basically ensures almost any forward facing restraint fails
You mentioned this quote and I'm very confused about it. The Plus Test is done with the P6 dummy to 25 kg and P3 to 18 kg and there is no "metal bar" involved. Seat and dummy are placed on the sledge and the (violent) test is executed. The dummy has sensors in the head and after the test values from the dummy are retrieved.

These values are quite critical for a young child. Today we can basically fix anything except for head and neck. The measures values in the Plus Test are retrieved and these can not be above the limits I mentioned in the previous post.

Forward facing seats could theoretically also pass the Plus Test. This is why there is no "metal barr". If a forward facing seat can be created which has forces below the allowed Plus Test limit then it will pass. Unless it also falls apart during testing of course . Likely outcome for an Aussie seat is falling apart during testing and also sky high values in head of the dummy. We can never escape the fact that forward facing seats have forces in head and neck of a young child which can not even be compared with rear facing children.

A seat breaking during testing is not necessarily a bad thing. It just depends on how it breaks. The goal is to protect a child with these huge forces so a seat breaking might be ok. After the Plus Test is done the seat is carefully studied. It's quite easy to see which parts are weak in a seat and where improvement is needed. Really interesting to see a seat after a test is made. Crucial issues would be if there are any parts breaking near the child. If a support leg is bent with forces within Plus Test limits then that would be fine. The child would still be well protected.

The Plus Test is very tough and abusive. But some manufacturers, definitely not all, also punish seats during the regular ECE R44 testing far more than anyone would dream of. Crash speed in the regular R44 test is like FVMSS 213 50 km/h. As you know a seat should be replaced after any accident. Britax does often perform severe overloading test of their Swedish rear facing seats. Seats which pass to 25 kg, 55 lbs, (Hi-Way, Max-Way, Multi Tech, Two-Way) with the P6 dummy are not replaced after each test.

Instead the same seat is tested ten times in a row. And not at 50 km/h. Speeds might be 70 km/h and the same seat keeps being tested over and over again. Just to see how much abuse it can take. The scary, or actually good thing, is that seats are fine after ten tests in succession at huge speeds. Quite incredible.

I love the crash testfacilities. Most often at the world famous VTI in Sweden. I have lots of video and photos of the Plus Test which I can't release right now due to NDA. This should be possible later in the year. It's always interesting to see a seat being tested and also a powerful reminder of the huge forces involved.

"Outsiders" are sometimes allowed to observe testing on the sledge. The usual reaction, especially among girls/women, is crying. I don't blame them, I'm always near tears myself. Regardless of the test it's very violent and a reminder of the huge forces involved.

I wish this would be mandatory for parents. I don't know of a single person who has watched a crash test and don't want to keep their child rear facing as long as humanly possible.

Apologies for the ridiculously long post. I really love car seats:)
 

Niniel

New member
Thanks again for your informative reply AdventureDad! And sorry for highjacking the thread!

Just for fun, please tell me where you heard your quoted description of the Plus Test? It's hysterically funny and incorrect

The correct value for G forces should be 26-30 G for R44 and around 40 G for the Plus Test. Sorry about the confusion, I blame it on the late night wine:)

You can basically take anything out of Australia regarding car seats and place it in the garbage. The rear facing limit is still in 2015 an incredibly low 12 kg (30.5 lbs). Such a fantastic country with well educated and super nice people. Really difficult to say anything negative except for the disaster with car seats. The AS 1754 is stone age and although it now finally allows Isofix it must be with top tether and no support leg is allowed. No point of even allowing Isofix with those conditions.
That was a quote from an Australian ''child restraint expert'', on the aus car seat facebook page.

Another thing he, and others, has claimed is that the only reason Sweden RF for so long, is because their FF aren't good enough(meaning they don't have a top tether). Sigh.

Being in Australia myself, I agree with you regarding the quality of the seats, however they no longer have weight limits on their seats, so technically a 30 kg child could still be RF, as long as he's under the height marker...


Not sure what you mean with this question. Deceleration is not a particular value, it has to do with the pulse. A steep pulse is more abusive. It's more abusive to crash into a cement wall than a wall of rubber tires. The G forces are much higher. I have below enclosed the pulse for the Plus Test for reference.

The Plus Test is performed on the regular R44 sledge but the pulse is as mentioned different. To pass to 25 kg, 55 lbs, the P6 dummy is used. It's quite a big and heavy dummy to carry around.
Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant the G force :)

Regarding the metal bar, I'm assuming he means the bar that is meant to substitute the dash board... He probably saw a picture and made up his own conclusion.

Thanks again for you reply, I find it very interesting, and I feel more confident than ever that using my illegal Swedish seats is the right thing to do.
 

SafeDad

CPSDarren - Admin
Staff member
Have you happened to see any recent statistics regarding injuries to infants in Australia, perhaps comparing 0-6m and 6-12m? Or anything similar?

I'm curious how it compares to the single major study in the USA on rear-facing. One less well-known result of that study is that infants under a year old did not have a significantly higher risk of injury when forward facing. There was an improvement for rear-facing infants, just not nearly as much as it was for children 12-23 months old. One theory is that the risk of spinal injury due to neck loads is not nearly as great as previously thought, and that the main benefit of rear-facing is protection against head-excursion related injuries for older/taller children.
 

Niniel

New member
There doesn't seem to be a lot of statistics or research available to the public. However, according to people in the child restraint industry no child has ever died from neck injuries while FF in a correctly used Australian seat. Which is also what the research available claims(anything I've found is a few years old).

Australian researchers are well aware of concerns
about the risk of neck injury for young children in
forward facing child seats. They have therefore
carefully investigated claims of serious neck injury
due to tensile loads in the neck. No cases have been
encountered in Australia, despite monitoring by road
safety authorities. There have been a number of
overseas cases where it was initially claimed that
serious injury from pure tensile loads occurred.
However, in all cases that have been investigated by
Australian researchers, it was subsequently found that
a head contact occurred and contributed to the neck
injury.
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-01/ESV/esv18/CD/proceed/00178.pdf

http://www.savonaemergenza.it/userfiles/file/paine_brown_crdata.pdf
 

SafeDad

CPSDarren - Admin
Staff member
Seems consistent with what I've always heard from various experts that head excursion is always the greatest actual risk and that neck load concerns have even been something of a red herring outside of crash testing.

Of course, rear-facing is safer for all ages, but it does seem a bit counter intuitive that infants might actually be almost as safe FF as RF, at least relative to toddlers anyway. One could speculate that 6 months is no worse than a 12 month recommendation, when it's the kids over 12 months (or at some higher age) that benefit far more from rear-facing.

It will be interesting to see more research on this in the future.
 

SafeDad

CPSDarren - Admin
Staff member
Table 4 is the quick summary: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598309/

Keep in mind that when talking about ISS9+ injuries, these are dominated by ISS9&10 injuries that are almost as common as all more serious classifications combined. ISS16 is usually the breakpoint for what is considered "severe" in my understanding, those injuries that have a larger risk of fatal or permanent injury. Most likely, had they limited it to ISS16+ as is sometimes done, they would not have had a statistically significant set of data, even using 15 years of data from 1998-2003. The study did have its limitations as the authors admit, but it's the only one we have so far and was the basis of the 2 year recommendation in the USA.

http://carseatblog.com/28995/rear-facing-vs-forward-facing-risk-of-fatal-injury/
 

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Forum statistics

Threads
219,417
Messages
2,201,332
Members
13,375
Latest member
kerryn1979

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.

Maxi Cosi is a proud sponsor of Car-Seat.Org!Graco 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! ©2001-2020 Carseat Media LLC

Top