Radian Question

[mcrmama]

We have 2 Radians, one that my 5 year old uses and one for my 18 month old. I noticed today when I was trying to re-install my older son's seat since someone had accidentally unbuckled it that in the manual it says you can only rear-face until 30lbs and 32 inches tall. My 18 month old is 32 inches now. When I checked that on a growth chart, he was at the 50th percentile so average for his age. I can't imagine turning him forward facing yet. Does this seem right? I just bought it before he was born. I know in Canada at that time, the weight limit is likely reasonable but I didn't realize the height limit. That seems pretty low. I just bought 3 new seats for our main vehicle so was not planning on getting anything new for a while now. I might e-mail Diono and ask what they suggest we do. He is on the 3rd slot in the harness for height and fits that slot right now. If we were to replace it with a newer Radian, does it have height requirements like that? This is for our cr-v. What we have in there right now is a Britax Parkway booster, and 2 Radians, one forward facing and one rear-facing. I hate the idea of having to re-install a radian as it was a lot of work getting it in there in the first place. If we do end up having to replace it, I wonder if the marathon or a my ride would fit in that spot and puzzle well with a forward facing radian. We could then keep it for when he is ready to forward face as it goes to 65 lbs which is lots for how my boys grow.

So for the rambling. Just seems strange that we would be forced to turn to forward facing on the next growth spurt.

 

[Judi]

Are you in Canada?

What is the DOM of you seat?

 

[mcrmama]

Yes, in Canada. I will check the date of manufacturing. I know I purchased the seat in December 2009 when I was 6 months pregnant. I just checked my invoice date when I had it shipped....okay, just checked manufacturing date for our Radian Premier is June 08 and the Radian 65 is Feb 08, so they must have been sitting for a while when I bought them.

 

[Judi]

According to this thread, yours would be only 30 lbs.

I do most of my puzzling with all the same direction. So hopefully someone else with come along.

Also, I reported the post, to get it moved to Canadian. More people to help!

 

[mcrmama]

Thanks. The 30lb limit I was aware of but I didn't realize the 32 inches, that is pretty short. He is only 23lbs so for weight we have a while if we could get the height to work too. He is not a big kid so this seems surprising. I have put in a customer service message on diono website to see what they say.

 

[Jessica61624]

I personally would be ok using it past the height limit as long as he has 1.5 inches above his head. They put a height limit on the new diono seats. They did say its its outgrown rf at 44in OR they have 1.5 inches above their head.

 

[tam_shops]

Until very recently, most Canadian seats had a 32" height restriction for Rear Facing.

In 2006, I think they all had it, but slowly over the last few years, they started to remove it. I know my 2009 Marathon had it, but don't think the Truefits then had it. Know now the Radian does not have it and suspect the Truefit still does not. Some of the other ones do, some do not.

At the time, I phoned BCAA and the tech there told us that it was a parental decision and there was no *reason* to follow it, but instead to follow the 1" from the top of the seat rule, for OUR seat. You could call them and ask for an explanation for your seat if you don't get through to SKJP. I know others that have phoned them and were told the Canadian and American version of the seat is the same (at that time) and it was a parental choice, but am sure it depends on the date on the seat, which way the wind is blowing and who you talk to, so call yourself...

**Removed wrong info about fitment**

tam

 

[snowbird25ca]

Until very recently, most Canadian seats had a 32" height restriction for Rear Facing.

In 2006, I think they all had it, but slowly over the last few years, they started to remove it. I know my 2009 Marathon had it, but don't think the Truefits then had it. Know now the Radian does not have it and suspect the Truefit still does not. Some of the other ones do, some do not.

At the time, I phoned BCAA and the tech there told us that it was a parental decision and there was no *reason* to follow it, but instead to follow the 1" from the top of the seat rule, for OUR seat. You could call them and ask for an explanation for your seat if you don't get through to SKJP. I know others that have phoned them and were told the Canadian and American version of the seat is the same (at that time) and it was a parental choice, but am sure it depends on the date on the seat, which way the wind is blowing and who you talk to, so call yourself...

I *think* I read here that it had something to do w/ fitment requirements meaning that if they say a 32" child will fit, ALL 32" children must fit, otherwise they'd have to put a lower number. Though, given the time frame and when it changed, it could also have had something to do w/ the legal definition of *child*, which had something to do w/ why our seats were tested to such low limits (compared to the American ones). IDK know for sure and I am not a tech, just recall the entire saga of it and how annoyed I was at the over that time! LOL

tam

There has never been a requirement for 32" height limits, and not all seats have always had 32" height limits - the original Evenflo Triumph, and the Titan only ever had the 1" rule combined with an overall numerical height limit for the seat.

All the CMVSS has ever required is that the labels and manuals state the height and weight limits for the size of child the seat is designed to fit. It has never said that rf'ing must have a separate height limit identified and nothing else can be given as a factor.

Fitment requirements can influence seats - for example, I have heard that the Chaperone is only rated to 22lbs in Canada because of fitment - that a heavier child wouldn't comfortably fit in the seat. But I know that it's not 100% - it's something like 95%, and I believe it is more weight related though I'll admit fitment is one area that I don't 100% understand. (I'm going to email to get some clarification in it actually.)

The rf'ing weight limits also had nothing to do with the definition of a child. This is just another myth that has floated around on the internet and gets perpetuated when somebody posts it without somebody who knows differently being able to correct it. Child restraint systems have been able to go all the way up to 48lbs since the 90's. If a manufacturer had wanted to, they could've certified a seat rf'ing up to 48lbs back then provided it met the standards. However, nobody chose to. There was no change in standards that prompted the drop from 35lbs to 30lbs. I have a suspicion of what caused so many to lower their weight limits, but it's nothing but speculation so I won't share it.

Also, there was no change in the standards when the weight limits started going back up. We've had some temporary orders put in place between the 2010 standards changes and the one prior to that - for example, in May of 2007 the interim order allowing manufacturers to certify ff'ing seats up to 65lbs was put in place. There was another one put in place that allowed infant restraints up to 10kg, but that one was very old. Other than that, there were no changes until 2010 - and yet we have had much in the way of changes in seats themselves - it's all about what the manufacturer has chosen to certify the seat to, and what they've chosen to put in their instructions and instruction manuals.

When the True Fit came in in 2008 it only had the 1" rule. The Radian moved to 44" when the XT came in in 2009? (was that the year the xt was introduced?), and the premier also went up to 44" in 2010. The base model stayed at 40" for that production year, but I think now that SK has changed to Diono that the R100 has a height limit of 44" as well.

All that history and clarification aside, only you can decide what to do in regards to the numerical rf'ing height limit. I'd start by calling Diono and seeing what they have to say.

 

[mcrmama]

Thank you for all the info. I have e-mailed Diono through their contact system on their website and will see what I get for a response. I've asked them to confirm height and weight for both seats. He fits the seat nicely right now so I hope we can keep him rear-facing for a while yet in his seat.

 

[tam_shops]

Thanks Trudy, removed the fitment thing, since what I *thought* I read was clearly wrong, sorry! Thanks for correcting! I think I read that miss-information here, recently, such a shame and made so much sense for our strange Canadian weight limits! LOL

I'm standing by the 32" thing though, summer 2006, when I wanted to ERF ODS, I looked at all the heights/weights of a bunch of seats and settled on the MA b/c it had a the highest RF weight limit at 33#. I remember looking at the Radian w/ 30# and 32" and a friend had an AOE w/ 30# and 32". She actually phoned TC and asked about it, but was told then that if the seat had it, she had to follow it. She too then looked into seats w/ better RF options and came up with nothing. I can honestly say I don't recall looking at the Evenflo though (might not have bothered if it had a 30# limit), and you've been doing this far longer than me so... Thought I looked at the Scenera, but not 100% on that. The Truefit came out later that year or the following year w/ a 35# limit and I don't think it had it. I know I debated that seat in 2008 when I finally had to decide if I was going to FF or get a new seat...

Sorry again for the miss-information!

tam

 

[snowbird25ca]

Please let us know what Diono says - I'll be interested in hearing what they're telling parents at this point now that they've changed the height limits on their seats.

Thanks Trudy, removed the fitment thing, since what I *thought* I read was clearly wrong, sorry! Thanks for correcting! I think I read that miss-information here, recently, such a shame and made so much sense for our strange Canadian weight limits! LOL

I'm standing by the 32" thing though, summer 2006, when I wanted to ERF ODS, I looked at all the heights/weights of a bunch of seats and settled on the MA b/c it had a the highest RF weight limit at 33#. I remember looking at the Radian w/ 30# and 32" and a friend had an AOE w/ 30# and 32". She actually phoned TC and asked about it, but was told then that if the seat had it, she had to follow it. She too then looked into seats w/ better RF options and came up with nothing. I can honestly say I don't recall looking at the Evenflo though (might not have bothered if it had a 30# limit), and you've been doing this far longer than me so... Thought I looked at the Scenera, but not 100% on that. The Truefit came out later that year or the following year w/ a 35# limit and I don't think it had it. I know I debated that seat in 2008 when I finally had to decide if I was going to FF or get a new seat...

Sorry again for the miss-information!

tam

LOL - the Evenflo seats never had the 32", I am 100% sure on that. However, you and your friend have the lone mystery 33lb seats since all other Canadian MA's in 2006 only went to 30lbs and that had been the case since 2004 and even my June 2006 seat was 30lbs. All other brands except Evenflo were 32" in 2006 though. That didn't change until the True Fit in 2008.

TC told me, when I called in late 2005, that fit and weight mattered and that it was ok to exceed 32" until my dd had hit 22lbs. Sometimes it really does depend on who you talk to - I know my question got forwarded to someone in car seats way back then who I recall thinking that he actually knew what he was talking about as opposed to everyone else I had contacted at that point...

But you're right that you may have read something about fitment or standards here as an explanation. I've corrected info on a few threads but I certainly don't see all threads. Typically it comes from US techs who have been around a long time and have heard rumors or that type of thing, but I know there was much speculation a number of years ago even by myself before I became educated in CMVSS and how it worked.

 

[tam_shops]

LOL Trudy, I'll change my "think they all had it" to most of them if you're sure on the Evenflo! ggg Really do have to watch the word all!

I did find a couple more 33#RF MAs around though, I had started to think it was an error or messed up batch b/c they were all bought at the same store, until someone in Ontario said they had one too, when I was posting it trying to figure out if I'd remembered it wrong and just thought it was 33# or the website said it was 33# and it was a website error (common). Though, one of the techs somewhere did say that there was a very brief period at one point where there were some 33# Canadian MAs, no idea when it started and assumed that it stopped w/ the 48 to 65# but then found other 33# MAs making me think I was crazier than ever and w/ my seat trashed at ICBC...

I did find a copy of my old manual though, I always copy them and put the photocopy in the car and original in my car seat box:

Note the 33# on the left side and 48# on the right page...I really did think I was going crazy until I found this and until I see one IRL myself, will always wonder! LOL

tam

 

[snowbird25ca]

LOL Trudy, I'll change my "think they all had it" to most of them if you're sure on the Evenflo! ggg Really do have to watch the word all!

I did find a couple more 33#RF MAs around though, I had started to think it was an error or messed up batch b/c they were all bought at the same store, until someone in Ontario said they had one too, when I was posting it trying to figure out if I'd remembered it wrong and just thought it was 33# or the website said it was 33# and it was a website error (common). Though, one of the techs somewhere did say that there was a very brief period at one point where there were some 33# Canadian MAs, no idea when it started and assumed that it stopped w/ the 48 to 65# but then found other 33# MAs making me think I was crazier than ever and w/ my seat trashed at ICBC...

I did find a copy of my old manual though, I always copy them and put the photocopy in the car and original in my car seat box:

Note the 33# on the left side and 48# on the right page...I really did think I was going crazy until I found this and until I see one IRL myself, will always wonder! LOL

tam

The recline adjustment was always allowed to be used up to 33lbs with a ff'ing child...

Check the rf'ing section or the front section for size of child in rf'ing mode. I'm curious to see if it differs in there. They always had that separate weight limit for the recline adjustment on a ff'ing seat though.

 

[tam_shops]

LOL that's the FF page!

 

[tam_shops]

Where is the weight limit written in the manual? I just flipped through and found the #33 and was so excited, really for my own sanity! Now I flipped through and see nothing else in it about weight. Aren't the weights in the manual?

Then, I flipped through CL and everyone claims to have 33# MA from 2006 w/ 65# FF limits. And, we both know that wasn't right, unless they have an American seat! I'm starting to wonder if I had a Canadian purchased American seat! LOL

tam

 

[Misty-Bug]

I am very slow to this and correct me if I am seeing this wrong.

but I am guessing you are wondering about the FFing recline boot and how long you can use it for? My manual says: "only use adjustable bottom to position forwardfacing restraint at a more recline angle"
does not list a weight limit at all

ETA: it also says "Maximum Height: Child is too tall for restraint if tops of the ears are above the back of the restraint OR if the child is more then 51" tall"

 

[equilibrium]

I asked Diono today about hw much shell needs to be above a child's head for outgrowing it and they responded on facebook page almost immediately stating 1.5". They did not provide me with any info for inches in height for growing out of the seat. They did state the 1.5 inch was for rear face and that the weight limit applies as well.

 

[mcrmama]

I heard back from Diono today and they said it was fine to use until 44 inches tall rear-facing.

 

[snowbird25ca]

I heard back from Diono today and they said it was fine to use until 44 inches tall rear-facing.

Thank you very much for that update! That removes the "parental decision" factor for a lot of parents and I truly appreciate hearing that they've taken a common sense approach to the rf'ing height limit.