News New booster ratings: 21 Best Bets and 7 Good Bets; 8 out of 72 seats evaluated aren't recommended

[Admin]

ARLINGTON, VA — Boosters are better than they used to be at fitting lap and shoulder belts on 4 to 8-year-old kids to restrain them in a crash. So parents don't have to search as hard for a good fit for their child and vehicle. Most belt-positioning boosters, though, don't offer consistently good fit in all vehicles. This is the bottom line in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's third round of booster evaluations.

More...

 

[crunchierthanthou]

Love to see that not recommended list is full of the Dorel and Evenflo ones we hate. Maybe it will help speed along their demise - of course, only if coalitions stop giving them out as program seats.

Here's a link to the other 36 seats that were neither good/best bets nor the ones not recommended - http://www.iihs.org/research/topics/boosters/other_tested_seats.aspx

 

[LISmama810]

Oh, I love this stuff. Such a nerd.

Besides the fabric, what's the difference between the "best bet" Turbo and the "good bet" Turbos?

I wasn't aware that Harmony had four dozen different backless boosters.

I'd love to see Dorel focus its booster product line on those good/best bets and destroy the rest, but I won't hold my breath.

Is there going to be a big media blitz with this like there was in the past?

 

[crunchierthanthou]

Besides the fabric, what's the difference between the "best bet" Turbo and the "good bet" Turbos?

That part has me scratching my head.

Crawford = best bet
Sachi and Wander = good bets

Crawford has the extra padding inserts. Wander doesn't. That could explain the difference. Except, Sachi has the inserts, too. It should have an identical rating to Crawford. I guess that just underscores that the ratings are subjective. :shrug-shoulders:

 

[LISmama810]

I guess that just underscores that the ratings are subjective. :shrug-shoulders:

"subjective" is a very kind word to use in that situation. (In reference to the Turbo difference.)

 

[myliljunebugs]

I'm so lost on this, were these tested with kids at the minimum weight range or something? The reason I ask is because DS fits the Monterey, Backless TB, and Olli quite well with excellent belt fit and DD fits the Monterey and Olli (no she NEVER rides in it, just put her in it for a second to check) with great belt fit and the Backless TB is horrendous. So I thought maybe they were putting 30lb kids in the high backs and 40lb kids in the backless? Because then I could see poor belt fit.

 

[LISmama810]

The way it worked in the past is that they used the 6-year-old-sized dummy and a few different cars.

So the results really are subjective in the sense that kids (and cars) are all built very differently. I think the idea is that a "best bet" is more likely to work with any given kid than an "avoid at all costs" one.

I have to admit I didn't check the original link to see if they did things the same this year. I just went right to crunchy's link to get the low-down on the recommendations.

 

[unityco]

So what seat are they using as the 'good belt fit' example? It looks to me like a Monterey (which they ironically rate neutrally.)

 

[christineka]

I wasn't paying attention and posted elsewhere. Here's my thoughts.

It's nice to see some previously "not recommended" seats have been redesigned and are now in the "best bets" list. The "not recommended" list is now mostly dorel and evenflo combo seats. I hope dorel and evenflo will do something to improve those seats or take away the booster feature on the seats. I am concerned about the evenflo maestro being in the "best bets" list as the headrest is not movable, so it is unlikely to fit a child taller than the standard 6 year old dummy.

So what seat are they using as the 'good belt fit' example? It looks to me like a Monterey (which they ironically rate neutrally.)

It's the probooster.

 

[SafeDad]

The way it worked in the past is that they used the 6-year-old-sized dummy and a few different cars.

So the results really are subjective in the sense that kids (and cars) are all built very differently. I think the idea is that a "best bet" is more likely to work with any given kid than an "avoid at all costs" one.

Hopefully our expert, Kecia, can shed some light, but this is how it worked last time. It's the same with their rear safety ratings for cars. They are pretty subjective, but should give you an idea of which models may work better in general.

 

[myliljunebugs]

Yeah, after I went back and actually read I saw that you guys are right, average sized 6 year old dummy. I may take pics of my kids in their seats and get opinions in case I'm just an idiot and THOUGHT they fit well

 

[my2kidsSafe]

can someone point me in the right direction here. This was posted on a friends facebook page and someone was asking for an article similar to this for infant and convertable seats. Is there any?

 

[SafeDad]

can someone point me in the right direction here. This was posted on a friends facebook page and someone was asking for an article similar to this for infant and convertable seats. Is there any?

You mean comparative safety ratings? Not really. Even these new IIHS ratings are not crash test ratings and have no implication on real world injury or fatality rates. The IIHS only evaluated the fit of the booster on a dummy, something that any parent can easily do themselves with their own booster and child.

Consumer Reports has some ratings from time to time, but in the past they have had a number of flaws and question marks. They also don't correlate them to any real world numbers or explain what their crash ratings really mean.

The NHTSA has ease of use ratings, but again, these are not crash or safety ratings at all. They are simply an evaluation of the features and manuals in an attempt to show that some models may be easier to use than others. As many advocates here will attest, sometimes those ratings vary greatly from the real world.

 

[SafeDad]

I have some information on results that have changed from the last review to this one or appear to vary only due to fabric style. First, when multiple versions of the same product are tested (like the Graco Turbobooster Crawford/Wander/Sachi), this is because the manufacturer submitted to the IIHS that the platforms varied enough so the differences may affect testing results. The exact physical differences are not noted, except that the IIHS did test them separately according to the instructions provided. That is the other issue that accounted for some differences on otherwise identical products. When a manual varies, even slightly, regarding the proper adjustment and use, it can result in different ratings from the 2009 test to this one or even if the manuals change slightly from version to version. That is because the IIHS tries to follow the manual as closely as possible when obtaining their test results.

 

[Admin]

Information on the 2011 Booster Seat Safety Ratings can be found here:

http://carseatblog.com/14037/the-safest-way-to-boost-em-newest-iihs-ratings-for-booster-seat-safety/