Harnesses NOT safer than HB boosters for older children?

[Maedze]

I agree that it gets the point across, I guess I just wish they wouldn't give an incorrect formula in the tech class. There's likely a better way to explain the same thing without being giving incorrect info which could affect a tech's credibility depending on who they are talking to.

Yup, I had someone totally smack me down because of that. It was really embarassing

 

[BookMama]

I agree that it gets the point across, I guess I just wish they wouldn't give an incorrect formula in the tech class. There's likely a better way to explain the same thing without giving incorrect info which could affect a tech's credibility depending on who they are talking to.

If there's a better, easy-to-understand way to explain it, I'd love to know. I'm pretty sure I could memorize it.

 

[TechnoGranola]

If there's a better, easy-to-understand way to explain it, I'd love to know. I'm pretty sure I could memorize it.

Well I am SO not the person to come up with an easy to explain way. I totally explain stuff all complicated, it makes sense to me, but to no one else. :ROTFLMAO: I'll see if DH can come up with something. He's a physics/math/computer background and is really great with explaining things in easy terms. When he tutored he was in high demand because the students loved how well he explained things.

 

[DahliaRW]

Ok, so in the same train of thought, I had read somewhere a while back that Ford was looking into a 4 point harness for adults. No idea what ever came of it, but, would it truly be safer?

 

[skaterbabs]

The reality is that a better explanation has been looked for. But you run into the limitations of being able to explain the idea WITHOUT using complicated mathmatical formulas or needing to drag out computational tools - be they pencil & paper or calculator.

That's why we use weight X speed. It's simple and effective, AND reasonably accurate. No it's not perfect, but it isn't intended to be.

 

[AtTheSouthDam]

:dizzy:

It's threads like this that just make want to RF until 5 or 6.

With DD1 it is a dead point, almost too big for the Regnet is too big for anything but a booster. But DD2... GAH!

Quick, someone get a grant and do the research!

I'm sorry I don't have anything to add, but I have been reading this discussion carefully.

And Jennifer, thank you very much for the links. They have influenced my booster choices for DD1 greatly

 

[Heather86]

:dizzy:

It's threads like this that just make want to RF until 5 or 6.
Quick, someone get a grant and do the research!

exactly we are still rf at 3 and 30 lbs depending on the shell height on the my ride we are either getting that or the multi-tech.... or moving to Sweden lol

This thread is great I love it when the discussion is both civil and informative.

 

[carseatcoach]

With DD1 it is a dead point, almost too big for the Regnet is too big for anything but a booster. But DD2... GAH!

I think most of us have been saying that after age 5(ish), there is not a significant advantage to harnessing if the child can use a booster properly. Extended harnessing is ideal for older kids who can't use a booster properly -- even though I believe that boosters are a safe and appropriate choice for many 5/6/7 yos, my own 7yo is still harnessed most of the time because she's very wiggly.

 

[carseatcoach]

The reality is that a better explanation has been looked for. But you run into the limitations of being able to explain the idea WITHOUT using complicated mathmatical formulas or needing to drag out computational tools - be they pencil & paper or calculator.

That's why we use weight X speed. It's simple and effective, AND reasonably accurate. No it's not perfect, but it isn't intended to be.

Apologies for serial posting. Although it still wouldn't be perfect, it would help a lot if we just take into account that even if a car is travelling at 60mph, it rarely impacts at 60mph -- even hitting the brakes for three seconds before impact can make a significant difference in speed.

 

[joolsplus3]

Ok, so in the same train of thought, I had read somewhere a while back that Ford was looking into a 4 point harness for adults. No idea what ever came of it, but, would it truly be safer?

I haven't heard about any updates or anything on that, but yes, it would be a lot safer, mostly in side and rollover crashes, because it would just hold you in place better. These are from the Volvo Safety Concept Car, (two different prototypes), but are probably what Ford is considering... http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/...ip/safety/volvo_safety_concept/safety.500.jpg

 

[skaterbabs]

Apologies for serial posting. Although it still wouldn't be perfect, it would help a lot if we just take into account that even if a car is travelling at 60mph, it rarely impacts at 60mph -- even hitting the brakes for three seconds before impact can make a significant difference in speed.

Yet even with that short caveat it begins to get too complicated for the average parent. Obviously you need to have a good feel for your clients, but the average parent simply isn't able to understand crash forces at all. Getting into complicated math just makes it worse.

 

[emandbri]

Try these. Hope this works. Progression of a high back booster with great headwings, down to a no back in a side impact crash test.

Wow, Jennifer I didn't know those videos where out there. Can someone put them on youtube? How does that work? Would we need permission to do so?

The backless one is SCARY! I'm sure showing that video would scare people into getting high backs! It it is making me want to put Daniel back in a high back even though folks here said he fit better in the backless.

 

[emandbri]

I haven't heard about any updates or anything on that, but yes, it would be a lot safer, mostly in side and rollover crashes, because it would just hold you in place better. These are from the Volvo Safety Concept Car, (two different prototypes), but are probably what Ford is considering... http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/...ip/safety/volvo_safety_concept/safety.500.jpg

Those are cool.

Here is the actual photo from ford.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2006/08/ford4pointbelt.jpg

here is the article.
http://images.google.com/imgres?img...ess&hl=en&sa=N&um=1&ei=Na0ASumoJZjNlQfFsIjnCg

from the article
"Ford quotes government figures stating that some 2,000 lives could be saved and thousands of injuries avoided or reduced with the use of these seat belts. But there's a catch: Such belts are currently not allowed by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208"

 

[snowbird25ca]

Those are cool.

Here is the actual photo from ford.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2006/08/ford4pointbelt.jpg

My concern would be the placement of the buckle in that picture. Imagine if the seatbelt wasn't a perfect fit - that hard buckle would be right on the soft tissue of the abdomen and it's a pretty big buckle from what I can see.

(Though now I'm wondering the difference in the crotch strap on kids considering some seats have had really super long crotch straps in the past and we didn't see problems with those... this picture just makes me think "ouch" though.)

 

[Victorious4]

Yet even with that short caveat it begins to get too complicated for the average parent. Obviously you need to have a good feel for your clients, but the average parent simply isn't able to understand crash forces at all. Getting into complicated math just makes it worse.

Exactly, especially when working with families of low socio-economic status. This isn't to say that every poor family is incapable of understanding more detailed math equations (I'm a poor single mom who got an A in calc) but math anxiety is a huge deal for most families regardless of income or education level & especially for those who might not even have their GED. The majority of my CPST work is with low income teen and/or refugee parents, the families with plenty urgent stressors to cope with that I don't need to use up our time teaching advanced physics concepts. The basics are all we can cover in the time we are given.

It's all about K.I.S.S.ing = keep it simple, stupid It might be more accurate to use a different equation, but we have no way of actually knowing what numbers represent those factors to make the other equation truly accurate, let alone simple.

The less the parents have to remember, the better. It is sooooo much easier to learn that the child's weight times the general speed before the crash gives us a *close enough* ESTIMATE (hence I always say "crash force is about ___" for a specific child at a certain speed)

 

[emandbri]

(Though now I'm wondering the difference in the crotch strap on kids considering some seats have had really super long crotch straps in the past and we didn't see problems with those... this picture just makes me think "ouch" though.)

I'm trying to remember but I know years ago at parents place we discussed crotch issues and whether the danger to the area in a crash was a good reason to move to a booster. I'm pretty sure the consensus was that in a crash the head and upper body is so much heavier than the lower body that they move forward more in a crash so there isn't the pressure on the crotch that might think there would be.

Honestly, with so many older non diapered kids in harnesses you would think if this was a true concern we would have heard something about it.

This is a reason not to have the seat too reclined. As you can imagine if a forward facing seat was very reclined there would be more pressure on the crotch.

 

[joolsplus3]

That's what I remember, too, Emily...it was that looooooong crotch strapped Evenflo Triumph that worried us all, and maybe the Airway? But they said the strap was long to reduce head excursion (butt flies forward, so head stays back? It was nuts sounding, lol). I think misused boosters and poorly designed boosters are going to cause way more abdominal injuries than harnessed seats ever could.

 

[midwestmeg]

New here... not sure which I am more excited about- the physics, the great info everyone has or the pictures in the siggies that are helping me out so much.

Unfortunately, this thread isn't making my life easier... dd (4.5) is right on the cusp of being able to use a booster... I think.

I hoped to make it through the summer in dd's Marathon (our goal has been to harness to age 5, roughly) but she is really outgrowing her seat quickly. She is 45'' but must have a long torso (shoulders are at the top slots of the Marathon) and 40 lbs. She is very mature, and very claustrophobic, so she's been motivated to sit properly in a booster for a long time. The only thing is that she still does like to sleep in her carseat.

Soooo... I started considering boosters but then came back to the fact that I like to harness, just because of the whole responsibility thing, and I wouldn't mind at least getting to 5 or so for the sake of maturity.

But now I'm just here geeking out on these great threads and all the info.

Thanks for all the awesome points in this discussion.

 

[Maedze]

Meg, I think a Nautilus would be ideal for your situation. It's a really rare four year old (or even newly five year old) who can go straight into full time boostering without getting a serious case of the wiggles.

In *your* shoes, I would probably buy a Nautilus/

 

[carseatcoach]

I would also recommend a Nautilus in that situation -- and just fyi, a 45" child who is outgrowing a Marathon by height doesn't necessarily have a long torso. That seems pretty standard to me.