It’s one of the many shocks for first-time parents. The realization that there isn’t any real comparative safety information available to consumers on the plethora of different carseats currently on the market. I remember my first carseat decision. It was spring 1997 and after surviving a particularly nasty wreck several months earlier, I was attempting to choose the “safest” carseat for my precious baby-to-be. I had no useful information to go on and I remember feeling really lost despite the fact that there were FAR fewer choices back then. I spent hours at different baby stores playing with seats, dismantling them, and desperately trying to make meaningful comparisons. Unfortunately, I wound up choosing an infant seat that I found out many years later was probably seriously flawed. Luckily, I never had to find that out the hard way like some other poor parents and their babies did.
Fast forward 12.5 years and not much has changed. I still have no choice but to “trust” that a product I purchase to protect my 5 year old under the worst possible circumstances is really up to the task. While designs are continuously improving, that is going go be offset to some degree by the increased demands placed on these seats. Apparently, it’s not enough for infants seats to be rated to 22 lbs anymore. Now everyone wants infant seats that can be used to 30 lbs or more. Higher weight limits, both rear-facing and/or forward-facing, are practically an expectation for any new seat that manufacturers develop today. And while we’re all happy to see this trend, you’ve gotta wonder how safe these seats are when really pushed to the max?
How exactly are manufacturers testing these seats when few federal standards exist for such increased ratings? Once again, we’re expected just to trust that these seats will do what they claim to be capable of. I dunno, maybe it’s the cynical New Yorker in me but I don’t find it easy to trust any company that won’t openly provide me with information on how their seats are tested and under what conditions. And yet, when almost every manufacturer plays the secrecy card we really don’t have a choice but to trust someone. So we buy something and pray that our trust isn’t misplaced as mine was in 1997.
For the record, I’m not advocating for full disclosure of all test data. I’m actually against full public disclosure because we can’t interpret the data in any meaningful way and people get too hung up on numbers while often failing to see the bigger, more important picture (does the seat fit your child? can it be installed properly in your vehicle? can you use it correctly all the time?). Case in point, NHTSA has published the results of data on seats they have compliance tested over the years. Most parents and techs never see the data because it’s buried in the vast NHTSA website but for those who have seen it – it causes a lot of confusion. Seriously, try to draw any meaningful conclusions from that data. Make sure you keep in mind the fact that your kid probably isn’t exactly the same size as the dummy they used, and you don’t drive a test sled with lap belts on a bench seat. If you want to take it a step further, try comparing the results from the same CR model (or clones) tested in different years.
Hopefully by this point you’re starting to understand why this is even a debate. Too little info is bad because there is no accountability and therefore little outside pressure for manufacturers to improve marginal products (especially if they’re selling well). On the other hand, too much info can be extremely confusing and counter-productive. If it becomes a numbers game then we’ll start seeing “Lowest Head Injury Criterion of Any Carseat in America!” become a marketing slogan for a seat that may be otherwise difficult to install and use properly. And we all know that parents will buy the seat that advertises the lowest HIC values just because they’ll assume it’s safer than a seat with higher HIC values. Never mind the fact that even I have no idea how HIC is actually calculated (it’s a complicated formula). My point is that even though HIC values are important enough to be calculated during standardized FMVSS 213 testing – it’s certainly only one small piece of the puzzle and no one should get hung up on a single number.
Personally, I’ve always advocated for more information but we need a compromise between what we have now (which is basically nothing) and total disclosure of everything. It will never be possible to determine which seats may be the “best” or “safest” for every possible child/vehicle scenario. However, it would be nice to at least know how the manufacturers are testing these new higher-weight seats and under what testing conditions. If tomorrow someone comes out with a seat that goes rear-facing to 80 lbs – don’t we have the right to ask “how do I know the seat is really safe to use rear-facing for my child at that weight?” and “how have you tested this seat to ensure its integrity and protective capabilities at this weight”?
As traditional weight and height limits are pushed more and more in an effort to capture a bigger market share, consumers and techs need assurances that these harnessed seats are being adequately tested at capacity. “Meets or exceeds all federal motor vehicles safety standards” is essentially meaningless when you’re talking about a CR that’s rated to 40 lbs (or more) rear-facing or 80 lbs forward-facing with the harness.
There is some good news on this front to report. Sunshine Kids Juvenile Products is the first manufacturer to provide what could be a model for appropriate and helpful performance and safety information for consumers. They are openly providing us with detailed summaries of crash test performance information on their RadianSL models without disclosing actual test data. Kudos to SKJP for being the first to acknowledge that parents, techs and advocates deserve a little more than “trust us”. I hope their willingness to provide consumers and CPS advocates with this type of information motivates other CR manufacturers to follow suit.
In similar fashion, the recent release of the NCAP crash test footage from Transport Canada provided us with plenty of graphic footage but no numbers for us to get hung up on. The TC video clips also highlighted, in my opinion, the need for additional and enhanced standards. In a market driven by increased demand for higher-weight-harness CRs, with little regulated safety standards for such HWH seats, we need assurances that they have been adequately tested and can actually live up to their claims.
I know I am in the minority among car-seat savvy parents, but I am very cautious about using my seats near their limit. i.e. if the RFing limit is 40 lbs., I start getting ready to turn my child FFing at 36-37 lbs. or so. It stands to reason that if a seat were to fail catastrophically, it would be most likely to do so when pushed to the limit of what it was designed for. I can’t control the severity of a potential crash, but I can control how close I am to the upper limits for child size in a particular seat.
So for me, I do appreciate higher weight limits in that I trust (hope?) that the seat was tested in some way to that high limit. I will never end up using the 80 lb. FFing capacity of my Radian XTSL, but I appreciate that if the seat can safely restrain an 80 lb. child, it will more than be able to withstand the forces of my 40 lb. child in an accident.
lots of good info to think about
(AND RAISE THE STANDARDS NHTSA!… and create them for aftermarket products!)
Great thoughts to ponder. Thanks!
Regarding the ever-increasing weight capacity of infant seats, I see the cause of it being less CR savvy consumers for whom that number represents quality and longevity of product (30 lbs will last longer than 22 lbs, so paying a little more can be rationalized). When sales migrate toward the higher capacity seats, manufacturers are going to respond by making more, and they’ve been out long enough to see that trend (Perego’s switch, Graco pushing 35, etc).
Technicians, manufacturers and advocates alike often tell parents to avoid 3rd party aftermarket devices. One reason given is that there is no testing standard to cover these products. Some of these manufacturers *DO* crash test them, though. How? They attach their product and then run the child safety seat through a FMVSS213 test. The combination may indeed pass the test, but there could still be safety issues because this addition wasn’t considered when the test was made. Thus, the third party product doesn’t technically meet any standard itself. This is not unlike adding weight to an existing dummy to test a child seat to a higher weight rating. The standards need to be updated to meet reality, especially in the case of side impacts where there isn’t even a baseline standard.
Safety Mom – I wish it were that simple but unfortunately that’s not how it works.
There are actually no standards in FMVSS213 for testing rear-facing child restraints past 22 lbs. CRs are required to pass compliance testing using the 22 lb, 29″ CRABI dummy which represents a 12 month old child. That’s all that NHTSA mandates of any infant seat or convertible seat tested in the rear-facing position. Also, there is no such thing as a 40 lb dummy. The 3-year-old Hybrid III dummy weighs 34 lbs and is used to compliance test *forward-facing* seats that are rated up to 40 lbs. If the CR is rated to 50 lbs or more in the forward-facing position – it is compliance tested using the 6 year old Hybrid III dummy that weighs 51.6 lbs. That is all that is currently required. At the moment there are no federal crash test standards for CRs that are rated beyond 50 lbs. Now most (hopefully ALL) manufacturers run their own private tests of their higher-weight harnesed seats using dummies that have been weighted. However, there are no federal standards by which to pass or fail the results, they don’t generally share their testing protocols or test results with consumers and we really have no assurances that these seats can adequately protect to the higher weights that they are rated to. We’re just expected to trust that they can and they will. Check out the links in the blog. The link to the “detailed summaries” will summarize it nicely.
*I meant if it’s rated 40lbs rear-facing, it’s tested at 40lbs rear-facing.
You say, ” ”Meets or exceeds all federal motor vehicles safety standards” is essentially meaningless when you’re talking about a CR that’s rated to 40 lbs (or more) rear-facing or 80 lbs forward-facing with the harness. ”
Why is it meaningless? If a seat is rated to 40lbs rear-facing, that means it was FMVSS-tested forward-facing with a 40lb child dummy. That’s where the weight rating COMES FROM.
If you don’t trust FMVSS testing, that’s one thing, but I don’t see how higher weight ratings make FMVSS results less useful.