Rear facing child seats are 5 times safer....
Discussion
As mentioned before I did a lot of research, bought a rear facer from Sweden but have used it front facing for our little girl; it was such a PITA to fit and remove, the passenger in front got crushed to death and there was very little leg room when our boy was in it.
I can't wait to get the girl (nearly three) on a booster seat; I bloody hate these enormous child seats!
I can't wait to get the girl (nearly three) on a booster seat; I bloody hate these enormous child seats!
jamieduff1981 said:
My eldest is about to turn 4 and the youngest about to turn 2. They moaned constantly in the latter months of being rear facing, and travelled much easier as soon as they were faced forwards in new seats.
I am not going to buy a rear facing seat and a long wheelbase XJ to fit them in just to prove what I most strongly suspect would be the outcome - that being that they hated staring at a seat. I also prefer to be able to interact with them (or at least the front passenger) on long journeys rather than just condition them to stare at a DVD player. Even passing them food or drink from the front passenger seat is greatly simplified by not having them facing backwards.
You don´t need a large car for that.I am not going to buy a rear facing seat and a long wheelbase XJ to fit them in just to prove what I most strongly suspect would be the outcome - that being that they hated staring at a seat. I also prefer to be able to interact with them (or at least the front passenger) on long journeys rather than just condition them to stare at a DVD player. Even passing them food or drink from the front passenger seat is greatly simplified by not having them facing backwards.
They can see out plenty through the back window and sidewindows in the larger ones. Especillay if you remove the headrest which you wouldn´t be using anyway.
Passing them things is not a problem either., as you don´t have to reach very far.
Daughter - now 9 years old was facing forwards right after the babyseat
Son - now 6 years old was facing backwards fulltime until 5½ years of age.
GreenMan said:
Interesting to read this - we've recently gone through the same process for our 18 month old and we've ended up with a BeSafe rear-facing seat, mostly for reasons mentioned above.
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)... With a view to a second coming along shortly (and therefore removing the option of just putting the seat on the passenger side instead) I've started looking for other cars... any excuse and all that.
Anyway, I took the seat along to try in both a Mercedes E-Class estate and a Discovery, both of which boast very generous rear legroom, and there was no way in the world it would fit with the front seat anywhere close to where it needs to be to accommodate my legs.
I'm going to have to go back to the drawing board - be warned, if you're even a little bit above average height, check VERY carefully that a rear-facing seat will fit. Goodness knows how the Swedes (statistically among the tallest people in Europe, and for whom rear facing is law) cope with anything less than a LWB Jag XJ...
You could try theseHowever, 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)... With a view to a second coming along shortly (and therefore removing the option of just putting the seat on the passenger side instead) I've started looking for other cars... any excuse and all that.
Anyway, I took the seat along to try in both a Mercedes E-Class estate and a Discovery, both of which boast very generous rear legroom, and there was no way in the world it would fit with the front seat anywhere close to where it needs to be to accommodate my legs.
I'm going to have to go back to the drawing board - be warned, if you're even a little bit above average height, check VERY carefully that a rear-facing seat will fit. Goodness knows how the Swedes (statistically among the tallest people in Europe, and for whom rear facing is law) cope with anything less than a LWB Jag XJ...
Britax Max-Fix
Britax Dualfix
Klippan Triofix
Fair G 0/1
these generally need less space in all cars than the Besafe.
I´m 5´11" and have been just fine in the smallest of cars with the above mentioned seats behind me. Citroen C1, Peugeot 107 and Toyota Aygo range Seat Mii, VW UP.
Big cars don´t necessarily offer more room in the passenger cabin than smaller cars.
One perfeclty good exsample of space is the Seat Altea XL which was here for car seat testing recently. This a good size family car. I could sit in front of even the most compact seats in this car but it was a really tight squeeze. They were fine for for the mother tough. Mother was shorter than both father and me. Father and I were okay but as I wrote before.. it was a tight squeeze for both of us.
My own car - which is similar size: Peugeot 308 SW. PLENTY of room.
What goes and what doesn´t spacewise is very individual. It comes down to a mixture of the car make and model, height of adults and the car seat itself
aizvara said:
Car size is definitely a consideration when you have children.
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.
bent legs is natural for children. All you have to do is watch them sit and play home. They sit with their legs well tugged in.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.
Bill said:
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%).
It´s the other way around. The biggest difference in safety forward vs rearward transportation is found in the frontal collisions. Side impacts are a bit less significant and somewhat less significant for rear impacts. 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%).
But mind you, in the majority of car crahses other than solo- accidents, there will be at least one car that is driving forwards.
car crashes are classified according to where the car was hit by another car.
mollytherocker said:
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.
We could not have afforded to have changed cars in order to accomodate a rear facing child seat.
The point about tyres is relevant. It's about an overall approach to safety.
Personally
Silent1 said:
Two vehicles with a closing speed of 60mph that crash into each other will dissipate the same amount of energy as a single car crashing at 30mph.
Not quite; two cars each at 30mph in a head on collision is the same as one car at 30mph colliding with a rigid barrier. Twice as much energy is involved in the two car case, but it is shared between the two cars, so half the total energy is absorbed in the crash by deformation of each car body. In the rigid barrier case, all the energy absorption happens in the single car and none in the rigid barrier.
Devil2575 said:
The point about legs isn't a non issue in any of the cars I have owned since we have had our children.
We could not have afforded to have changed cars in order to accomodate a rear facing child seat.
The point about tyres is relevant. It's about an overall approach to safety.
Personally
Affordability is totally fair and you have to do what you can with the budget you have.We could not have afforded to have changed cars in order to accomodate a rear facing child seat.
The point about tyres is relevant. It's about an overall approach to safety.
Personally
Tyres are relavant but NOT to a discussion about seats! Its a totally different subject. They are in no way related.
My original question was about the validity or accuracy of the industries comments that rear facing are 5 times safer than forward facing.
My view is now that they are up to 5 times safer in the majority of accidents and that is enough for me.
All the points about legs, my child doesnt like it, they are awkward, etc etc to me are side issues and in no way 'balance out' the overall safety of the child in a major accident.
lenats31 said:
Klippan Triofix, son 5 years old 120 cm tall. We werent using the spacer that you can buy for this seat to add legroom. He only sat in it this once as it was for testing.
I wouldn't be happy with that leg room, just not fair really.
Looks like your passenger seat is verticle too.
DoubleSix said:
I assume you didn't purchase.
I wouldn't be happy with that leg room, just not fair really.
Looks like your passenger seat is verticle too.
I got it free of charge from a friend in Stockholm/ SwedenI wouldn't be happy with that leg room, just not fair really.
Looks like your passenger seat is verticle too.
It´s for children you know.;)
That would be the driver´s seat on mainland Europe where I am.
I was good there in the front seat.
He was comfortable in the seat. He had exceeded the weight limit for rearfacing in this seat.
He was rearfacing in another seat up until the age of 5½ years old. Then he started to complain about it and we started booster training him, and he was in a rearfacing seat on/off until he turned 6. He is riding in a booster seat now and only that.
4 years was the main aim we had for him in that direction. The time after that, he got to decide when he was nolonger comfortable. We let him decide after 4 years.
Look, these bigger rearfacing seats have exsisted since the 1960s - starting in Sweden. If the majority of children or all of them were uncomfortable, became disabled and were constantly whining I´m sure my fellow Northern neighbours would have found out by now after 50 years+.
Edited by lenats31 on Friday 17th January 12:22
DoubleSix said:
lenats31 said:
Klippan Triofix, son 5 years old 120 cm tall. We werent using the spacer that you can buy for this seat to add legroom. He only sat in it this once as it was for testing.
I wouldn't be happy with that leg room, just not fair really.
Looks like your passenger seat is verticle too.
lenats31 said:
I got it free of charge from a friend in Stockholm/ Sweden
It´s for children you know.;)
That would be the driver´s seat on mainland Europe where I am.
I was good there in the front seat.
He was comfortable in the seat. He had exceeded the weight limit for rearfacing in this seat.
He was rearfacing in another seat up until the age of 5½ years old. Then he started to complain about it and we started booster training him, and he was in a rearfacing seat on/off until he turned 6. He is riding in a booster seat now and only that.
4 years was the main aim we had for him in that direction. The time after that, he got to decide when he was nolonger comfortable. We let him decide after 4 years.
Look, these bigger rearfacing seats have exsisted since the 1960s - starting in Sweden. If the majority of children or all of them were uncomfortable, became disabled and were constantly whining I´m sure my fellow Northern neighbours would have found out by now after 50 years+.
Hey look, it's each to their own at the end of the day and I've tried to be pretty balanced throughout this thread. But at no point has anyone (that I'm aware of) said it's harmful or will make you kid disabled!! That's just straw man business. It´s for children you know.;)
That would be the driver´s seat on mainland Europe where I am.
I was good there in the front seat.
He was comfortable in the seat. He had exceeded the weight limit for rearfacing in this seat.
He was rearfacing in another seat up until the age of 5½ years old. Then he started to complain about it and we started booster training him, and he was in a rearfacing seat on/off until he turned 6. He is riding in a booster seat now and only that.
4 years was the main aim we had for him in that direction. The time after that, he got to decide when he was nolonger comfortable. We let him decide after 4 years.
Look, these bigger rearfacing seats have exsisted since the 1960s - starting in Sweden. If the majority of children or all of them were uncomfortable, became disabled and were constantly whining I´m sure my fellow Northern neighbours would have found out by now after 50 years+.
Edited by lenats31 on Friday 17th January 12:22
I just personally wouldn't feel right asking my kid, who has no say, to sit like that. I think the scandi's are as usual putting safety right to the very top of the agenda and that's fine, but I'll balance that with other factors.
DoubleSix said:
Hey look, it's each to their own at the end of the day and I've tried to be pretty balanced throughout this thread. But at no point has anyone (that I'm aware of) said it's harmful or will make you kid disabled!! That's just straw man business.
I just personally wouldn't feel right asking my kid, who has no say, to sit like that. I think the scandi's are as usual putting safety right to the very top of the agenda and that's fine, but I'll balance that with other factors.
None of them were written by you if memory serves me fine. So stupid of me to mention that in a reply to you. Should have been written in a seperate entry.I just personally wouldn't feel right asking my kid, who has no say, to sit like that. I think the scandi's are as usual putting safety right to the very top of the agenda and that's fine, but I'll balance that with other factors.
These seats are surounded by myths - many of them are mentioned in this thread. The leg one and general discomfort is all over the place everywhere you look for forward vs rearfacing here and on the internet- a particular entry in this thread about the leg space is on page 7. I hear and read them all the time and everywhere. The social skills is also often used. Space requirements for them etc. they are all very common. They come from people with little or no experience with them.
boobles said:
The thing to remember guys is having scrunched up legs will not harm the child in any way & unless they make you aware that they are not happy, then assume they are fine.
Yeah, agreed. My son has been in front facing seats with other parents, and never complained about getting back in our car. As mentioned, he hated his previous seat (rear facing) and complained loudly and continuously. So we got a bigger seat as soon as possible. No more complaints, long journeys are pleasant now.DoubleSix said:
But at no point has anyone (that I'm aware of) said it's harmful or will make you kid disabled!! That's just straw man business.
At least one person has said that they think it will probably be harmful.As an aside, and directed at no-one in particular, I can't actually see what would be different in the car (other than his facing) when we get a front facing seat/booster to replace this one. His legs will be in a different resting position I expect. And the passenger seat will move slightly further back to accommodate taller people more comfortably - currently it is pretty much level with the driver's seat.
I'm a bit worried that he'll not be able to see outside quite so well, as there's the front seats and more distance between him and the window. So he'll probably end up looking out the side window more, or get bored more easily.
I have a feeling that if we had such a good range of rear-facing child seats here in the UK as is found in Sweden then the thread may have followed a somewhat different course.
The only seats we could find when looking about 5 years ago required a particular type of family car - of course we may have stumbled across the reason why Volvo V70 rear seats are set further back in the car, giving more rear-seat legroom and less boot space when compared with other similar sized cars?
The only seats we could find when looking about 5 years ago required a particular type of family car - of course we may have stumbled across the reason why Volvo V70 rear seats are set further back in the car, giving more rear-seat legroom and less boot space when compared with other similar sized cars?
oldcynic said:
I have a feeling that if we had such a good range of rear-facing child seats here in the UK as is found in Sweden then the thread may have followed a somewhat different course.
The only seats we could find when looking about 5 years ago required a particular type of family car - of course we may have stumbled across the reason why Volvo V70 rear seats are set further back in the car, giving more rear-seat legroom and less boot space when compared with other similar sized cars?
That´s a good point.The only seats we could find when looking about 5 years ago required a particular type of family car - of course we may have stumbled across the reason why Volvo V70 rear seats are set further back in the car, giving more rear-seat legroom and less boot space when compared with other similar sized cars?
One major issue with this outside of Scandinavia is the test results. Rearfacing seats allways loose big time in the Userfriendliness section. This is where you´ll find installation, userguide, legroom, space-requirements, view out the car and those sorts of things. They all have two things in common: They are all tested by a group of parents in Germany, who in most cases have never seen a rearfacing seat this group, and so find them difficult to install etc. The next thing is that all results in this section of the test are subjective - based on opinions. The parents are handpicked every time a test round is being done. They do know forward facing seats very well tough. Not these large rearfacing ones.
Space requirements results are only based on what you see when the seat has been installed into the car. For a forward facing seat that means it is only the one that you see right there. The forward pitch of the seat in a frontal impact is not counted for right here.
So what you have is a bunch of parents who have never laid eyes on such a seat before (rearfacing) as forward facing seats are the norm. What they think doesn´t necessarily go for you. If you don´t have trouble with the installation, have decent room for your self, child doesn´t complain about discomfort and not able to see anything. and you do everything right. Then the testresuls don´t count for you.
It works the same way for forward facing seats, which they often find no or reduced trouble with. The good result there dont count if you hav truble with the particular seat, have not installed it correctly, not use it correctly etc.
You wouldn´t believe how many parents that aren´t aware of this. Hardly no-one does.
Userfriendliness count for 50% of the overall score. Safety is 50%.
It is quite understandable that such thing as correct installation, seats stability are important factors that will affect the seats crashworthiness. So certainly not something that should be taken lightly. Installation is just one side of it. You MUST use the seat correctly all the time too. Misuse will result in poorer crashworhiness as well.
But if you have a rearfacing seat that got a bunch of poor scores and a Don´t Buy. If you don´t have trouble in the areas where it scored poorly and do it all correctly, then you could very well be the owner of a Best Buy car seat.
By the way, ADAC remove the front seats when testing these rearfacing seats. That´s not how we install them. Ideally they should be in contact with the front seat.
Furthermore it is allways the worst results that will be used to evaluate the seat. SO if you have a seat such as the Britax Multi-tech that can face forwards from 9 kg too. Then you are sur to get the crash results from forward facing mode and not rearfacing.
Don´t Buy Results that rearfacing seats often get result in a poor market for them as most parents want the Best Buy seats only. To them, this test is not a GUIDE which is reallye meant to be. It is THE ANSWER what seat will be the best one regardless.
They only test 1 or 2 rearfacing seats each time. So these test families don´t get a bunch of rearfacing seats to compare.
The manufactorers often get the blame for this. The problem isn´t them. This test is and the lack of knowledge about how the it is carried out, which results are used to evaluate the seats etc. (read above). If you look at countries such as Sweden, Norway and Finland what you will find is that everybody is pushing rearfacing hard and have done since the 1960s. Insurance companies, etc. car manufactorers, everything and everybody is involved.
Edited by lenats31 on Saturday 18th January 14:11
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff