Rear facing child seats are 5 times safer....
Discussion
GreenMan said:
However, I'm 6'2" tall and there's no way in a million years it will fit behind me in our BMW 3er Touring (E91 if you're interested)...
Hi GreenMan, does your child's head fall forward when he/she is asleep in the E91. I have an E87 1-series and the rear seat of the car is angled too steeply for even the child seat's angle adjustments to compensate. Looking at E90/91s at the moment but yet to drive/try one...Devil2575 said:
We never considered rear facing child seats once we moved past the stage 1 baby seats. Where are the childs legs supposed to go? Round their ears?
Yeah - and probably grow up with hip displacement problems and generally just walk like John Wayne.I trust all rear-facing seat owners are driving around on young Michelin PS, Goodyear Eagle F1A2s, ContiSports or similar absolutely top-notch rubber. It would of course be a contradiction to drive around on mid-range or budget tyres having made so many other compromises in favour of safety inside the cabin.
jamieduff1981 said:
Yeah - and probably grow up with hip displacement problems and generally just walk like John Wayne.
I trust all rear-facing seat owners are driving around on young Michelin PS, Goodyear Eagle F1A2s, ContiSports or similar absolutely top-notch rubber. It would of course be a contradiction to drive around on mid-range or budget tyres having made so many other compromises in favour of safety inside the cabin.
Yes, I dont buy crap tyres. But your point is irrelavant, we are talking about seats. Tyres are a totally different discussion all together, as is car choice, servicing, driving style etc etc.I trust all rear-facing seat owners are driving around on young Michelin PS, Goodyear Eagle F1A2s, ContiSports or similar absolutely top-notch rubber. It would of course be a contradiction to drive around on mid-range or budget tyres having made so many other compromises in favour of safety inside the cabin.
The point about legs is a non issue and is the usual one that is trotted out. They are fine.
jamieduff1981 said:
Yeah - and probably grow up with hip displacement problems and generally just walk like John Wayne.
I trust all rear-facing seat owners are driving around on young Michelin PS, Goodyear Eagle F1A2s, ContiSports or similar absolutely top-notch rubber. It would of course be a contradiction to drive around on mid-range or budget tyres having made so many other compromises in favour of safety inside the cabin.
Eagle F1 Asym & Ultragrip 7+s. Does anyone on PH buy crap tyres? (Excepting those intending to reduce grip). I trust all rear-facing seat owners are driving around on young Michelin PS, Goodyear Eagle F1A2s, ContiSports or similar absolutely top-notch rubber. It would of course be a contradiction to drive around on mid-range or budget tyres having made so many other compromises in favour of safety inside the cabin.
However, I'd argue that people are allowed to make a decision about where best to focus on safety without it being a contradiction, particularly given that most tyres (with 3mm+ tread) are perfectly safe for the sort of driving one does with children on board.
Re: leg room. I looked at my son's seating position this morning - he's about a metre tall which is average height for his age. His legs dangle down fine over the edge of the seat. They don't press up against anything unless he wants them to. If they did, he could easily sit cross-legged. He's got probably another six months or so in this seat, and he'll certainly have no problems with where his legs go within that time.
Not sure about leg room being a 'non-issue' Molly. Even as someone who can clearly see the benefits of rear facing seats the legroom factor is one of the key things I'll consider and will probably tip the scales against me continuing with rear facing over my childs next growth phase.
DoubleSix said:
Not sure about leg room being a 'non-issue' Molly. Even as someone who can clearly see the benefits of rear facing seats the legroom factor is one of the key things I'll consider and will probably tip the scales against me continuing with rear facing over my childs next growth phase.
It must not be a massive issue given that the entirety of at least one nearby country mostly has their children in rear facing until four or even older. All the kids I know from Sweden have no hip or leg issues (for any reason), and my son seems fine too.aizvara said:
DoubleSix said:
Not sure about leg room being a 'non-issue' Molly. Even as someone who can clearly see the benefits of rear facing seats the legroom factor is one of the key things I'll consider and will probably tip the scales against me continuing with rear facing over my childs next growth phase.
It must not be a massive issue given that the entirety of at least one nearby country mostly has their children in rear facing until four or even older. All the kids I know from Sweden have no hip or leg issues (for any reason), and my son seems fine too.It IS a consideration.
Consider the promo photo in this link posted earlier:
http://www.besafe.com/en/Car-seat-Products/Toddler...
Now, I would suggest that no-one in that vehicle is particular comfy or well position for a long stint except possibly the driver. The kid in the rear facing can't stretch his/her legs. The front passenger is ridiculously squashed forward to be almost licking the windscreen and the kiddo behind the driver also looks like his knees are probably against the drivers seat.
Every decision has it's compromises and to pretend that rear facing, or indeed front facing, have no drawbacks is disingenuous. One has to balance a lot of factors a deicde what is right for their personal circumstances.
http://www.besafe.com/en/Car-seat-Products/Toddler...
Now, I would suggest that no-one in that vehicle is particular comfy or well position for a long stint except possibly the driver. The kid in the rear facing can't stretch his/her legs. The front passenger is ridiculously squashed forward to be almost licking the windscreen and the kiddo behind the driver also looks like his knees are probably against the drivers seat.
Every decision has it's compromises and to pretend that rear facing, or indeed front facing, have no drawbacks is disingenuous. One has to balance a lot of factors a deicde what is right for their personal circumstances.
DoubleSix said:
Consider the promo photo in this link posted earlier:
http://www.besafe.com/en/Car-seat-Products/Toddler...
Now, I would suggest that no-one in that vehicle is particular comfy or well position for a long stint except possibly the driver. The kid in the rear facing can't stretch his/her legs. The front passenger is ridiculously squashed forward to be almost licking the windscreen and the kiddo behind the driver also looks like his knees are probably against the drivers seat.
Every decision has it's compromises and to pretend that rear facing, or indeed front facing, have no drawbacks is disingenuous. One has to balance a lot of factors a deicde what is right for their personal circumstances.
And I guess the roof has to be down just to fit the children in their seats?! http://www.besafe.com/en/Car-seat-Products/Toddler...
Now, I would suggest that no-one in that vehicle is particular comfy or well position for a long stint except possibly the driver. The kid in the rear facing can't stretch his/her legs. The front passenger is ridiculously squashed forward to be almost licking the windscreen and the kiddo behind the driver also looks like his knees are probably against the drivers seat.
Every decision has it's compromises and to pretend that rear facing, or indeed front facing, have no drawbacks is disingenuous. One has to balance a lot of factors a deicde what is right for their personal circumstances.
DoubleSix said:
I haven't said it's a MASSIVE issue either, I'm just trying to introduce some balance into what is become a bit of a black and white discussion.
It IS a consideration.
I'd say that if your children don't fit in a rear facing seat, then it is time to move them onto a front facing seat. Hopefully any benefit of being in a rear facing will have diminished by that size/age.It IS a consideration.
If they have unusually long legs for their size/age then they could sit cross-legged or legs up the back seat (depending on angle). There's a gap between the car seat and the child seat in my car, and my son's legs fit there, if he wants them to. He's often waving them about, though.
Re: the photo - our child seat is from that manufacturer. Looks like a bit of an odd choice for a family car to me: in our car, the front passenger seat is almost as far back as the driver's seat, and people taller than 6' have sat fine for longish journeys.
BTW, I haven't pretended that rear facing has no compromises. I listed my thoughts on that earlier in the thread. I regard those compromises as easily acceptable or worked around though.
Bill said:
That car is far too small, but chosen because the roof goes down.
Does anyone have the actual figures for the "five times safer" quote? If the KSI risk goes from 1:1,000,000 to 1:5,000,000 then I'm not overly worried.
So one's car size is a factor to consider then. Does anyone have the actual figures for the "five times safer" quote? If the KSI risk goes from 1:1,000,000 to 1:5,000,000 then I'm not overly worried.
However, the fact that it's a small car car doesn't alter the fact that rear facing occupant can't straighten or even stretch his/her legs - the same situation would exist in a large car.
DoubleSix said:
So one's car size is a factor to consider then.
However, the fact that it's a small car car doesn't alter the fact that rear facing occupant can't straighten or even stretch his/her legs - the same situation would exist in a large car.
Car size is definitely a consideration when you have children.However, the fact that it's a small car car doesn't alter the fact that rear facing occupant can't straighten or even stretch his/her legs - the same situation would exist in a large car.
If that car seat and child seat combination has anything like the space available for my son, the child will be able to stretch and move their legs as they are elevated above and away from the seat back. The natural position is to sit with bent legs, however, just as I do when driving for extended periods.
I run the BeSafe izi combo isofix in both my A4 Avant and the Cayenne. In the A4 the front seat legroom is limited, but I can sit in it for short-ish journeys – up to an hour perhaps. I’m 6’5”. The leg issue for the kids is a non-issue as kids are uber-flexible. For me the safety issue is utmost. The whole of Scandinavia uses these things and they are not all bandy-legged, poorly developed adults - far from it!! My 3 year old is 1m tall and never complains about her legs. Of course, with that seat it can easily be turned front facing with seatbelts if you so wish.
Use whatever suits your lifestyle and stop criticising others for their own choices!
Use whatever suits your lifestyle and stop criticising others for their own choices!
So, having had a dig about for the "5 times safer" stats...
I can't find any research conclusion that says this. I've found some research that says side impacts are circa five times safer rear facing but while a front impact is safer their findings weren't statistically significant. Side impacts account for circa 23% of impacts (front 47%, rear 20%).
In the UK in the year to Sept 2012 there were 197,000 KSIs, with under 16s accounting for 2,360 of these. And of the 2,360 only 770 were passengers in cars with the rest pedestrians or on bikes.
Given 800,000 births in 2012, and the additional cost of a rear facing seat of say £100, that's an additional spend of £80M a year. No wonder the child seat lobby is so keen on rear facing seats.
I can't find any research conclusion that says this. I've found some research that says side impacts are circa five times safer rear facing but while a front impact is safer their findings weren't statistically significant. Side impacts account for circa 23% of impacts (front 47%, rear 20%).
In the UK in the year to Sept 2012 there were 197,000 KSIs, with under 16s accounting for 2,360 of these. And of the 2,360 only 770 were passengers in cars with the rest pedestrians or on bikes.
Given 800,000 births in 2012, and the additional cost of a rear facing seat of say £100, that's an additional spend of £80M a year. No wonder the child seat lobby is so keen on rear facing seats.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff