Appears to be the Royals go to brand as well I seem to recall.
Baby seat for a 2 year old
- Thread starter jammir
- Start date
We have a Cybex Cloud Z - our nearly 2 year old has obviously outgrown the baby one (we chose this as it was a carry and swivel) so we've upgraded the size of the seat - no longer a carry, but still a swivel.
You've probably missed the boat for that one, with having a two year old already - but any one else who reads this, it's been a great seat(s).
You've probably missed the boat for that one, with having a two year old already - but any one else who reads this, it's been a great seat(s).
DO it correctly.
www.kiddies-kingdom.com
Buy rear facing, can be used till 6-7 unless they are a giant child.
People say their child moans about leg room... TOUGH! Safety over a little leg room any day.
Rear facing seats are VASTLY safer than forward facing.
I saw a young child in a front facing seat on the front passenger seat yesterday. I happened to walk close enough to see it was sat on a Box... I expect so the child could see out the window?
What's the point in the seat? Do these parents not want a living child if they crash?
My son is 110cm tall, and is 4 next month. He loves his seat... never once moaned about the leg room. He's had the same one for over 2 years. It still has a couple more years life in it.
A forward-facing seat, on the other hand, throws the child forward. While the upper body is fixed by the belt system, the head falls forward unprotected and is then suddenly pulled back again. The impact forces therefore act particularly on the sensitive neck area, which can lead to serious or even fatal spinal and head injuries.
Axkid Minikid 2 Rearward Facing Car Seat-Granite (2022/2023)
Buy Axkid Minikid 2 Rearward Facing Car Seat-Granite (2022/2023) . Price match guarantee and free next day delivery on orders over £50.
www.kiddies-kingdom.com
Buy rear facing, can be used till 6-7 unless they are a giant child.
People say their child moans about leg room... TOUGH! Safety over a little leg room any day.
Rear facing seats are VASTLY safer than forward facing.
I saw a young child in a front facing seat on the front passenger seat yesterday. I happened to walk close enough to see it was sat on a Box... I expect so the child could see out the window?
What's the point in the seat? Do these parents not want a living child if they crash?
My son is 110cm tall, and is 4 next month. He loves his seat... never once moaned about the leg room. He's had the same one for over 2 years. It still has a couple more years life in it.
More protection in the event of a frontal impact
In principle, securing children backwards offers advantages, especially in the event of a frontal crash, since the load is distributed over a wide area over the child's back and thus no increased neck forces can occur. This is important because children's heads are very large and heavy compared to their total body weight, while their neck muscles are not yet fully developed. In the event of a frontal collision, the child is pushed into the seat, which means that the strain on the neck is significantly lower.A forward-facing seat, on the other hand, throws the child forward. While the upper body is fixed by the belt system, the head falls forward unprotected and is then suddenly pulled back again. The impact forces therefore act particularly on the sensitive neck area, which can lead to serious or even fatal spinal and head injuries.
Last edited:
Which seats you looked at? The local Halfords ones? I'm shocked you even made the time to post that dribble.
@Diagro - this is the seat we went for. Huge pain in the arse to fit it in the car but the safety reviews speak for themselves. Our daughter is nearly 5 and still in it and hasn’t complained about leg room. Despite the initial cost of the seat, we’ve not had to buy another interim toddler car seat, she went straight from the baby seat into this and has continued to last well.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,816
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
My second was too big after 12 months for reward facing. He is 95th percentile in height. He is taller than some 4-5 year olds and not even 3 yet! It is a bit annoying as we replaced his isofix rather quickly because of it.
He has the Recaro Young Sport Hero. Lovely seat although very wide so might be a bit cramped if you got several kids. He will keep that till he gets tall enough to sit without a seat.
But.. it doesn't even have ISOFIX putting the onus on installing it correctly on the parents, which is a risk.DO it correctly.
Axkid Minikid 2 Rearward Facing Car Seat-Granite (2022/2023)
Buy Axkid Minikid 2 Rearward Facing Car Seat-Granite (2022/2023) . Price match guarantee and free next day delivery on orders over £50.
Buy rear facing, can be used till 6-7 unless they are a giant child.
People say their child moans about leg room... TOUGH! Safety over a little leg room any day.
Rear facing seats are VASTLY safer than forward facing.
I saw a young child in a front facing seat on the front passenger seat yesterday. I happened to walk close enough to see it was sat on a Box... I expect so the child could see out the window?
What's the point in the seat? Do these parents not want a living child if they crash?
My son is 110cm tall, and is 4 next month. He loves his seat... never once moaned about the leg room. He's had the same one for over 2 years. It still has a couple more years life in it.
More protection in the event of a frontal impact
In principle, securing children backwards offers advantages, especially in the event of a frontal crash, since the load is distributed over a wide area over the child's back and thus no increased neck forces can occur. This is important because children's heads are very large and heavy compared to their total body weight, while their neck muscles are not yet fully developed. In the event of a frontal collision, the child is pushed into the seat, which means that the strain on the neck is significantly lower.
A forward-facing seat, on the other hand, throws the child forward. While the upper body is fixed by the belt system, the head falls forward unprotected and is then suddenly pulled back again. The impact forces therefore act particularly on the sensitive neck area, which can lead to serious or even fatal spinal and head injuries.
You're also making your life a living nightmare for any long journeys putting a 7 year old facing backwards.
These backward facing seats are all well and good for babies but think it's preying on parents' fears for older kids.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,447
I've stuck with front facing as soon as we could. Both kids are just in backed boosters, I honestly don't see how you could get a child (I.e. not baby) in a rear facing seating without causing them spinal issues. Not to mention good luck getting a rear facing seat in a small car. I know technically it might be safer, but in my mind every time you'd accelerate you be causing their head to jolt towards the back of the car, not sure if they'd get car sick too. I know this is not a popular opinion, but it's my choice. Of for reference they are 5 and 8, my daughter is almost tall enough to not need a seat and my son is 115cm so pretty tall.
Installation is easy... very simple.
If a child cannot be quiet, and makes the parents like a living nightmare.. then that says more about the parents ability to parent no?
No, rear facing seats are better for ALL ages, especially in the event of a frontal collision.
Its basic physics...
Of course, if a child is just too big, then it wont be practical.
That is one way to think about it. Although, I'd not class having legs slightly bent "squashed".
Why cause some minor discomfort? Priorities.
I prioritise my children's LIFE over minor discomfort. You CANNOT trust other road users. Each time you take a child out onto a road its a statistical risk of major harm and or death. If using a rear facing seat (which may or may not cause minor leg discomfort) drastically reduces the chance of major injury or death. I know what my choice is.
Not really, no. Children don't have full rational control over their behaviour at that age.
Obviously something you value very highly.
I'm happy to trade off slightly worse safety in the event of a high speed frontal collision (0.001% of journeys) for a happier child (99.999% of journeys) while still using a fully legal and compliant car seat.
OK I haven't looked up the exact number but the chances of being in the type of accident you are so worried about must be tiny tiny.
Taking this to an absolute extreme, if you really cared about your child's life... you'd never take them out of the house?
Taking it to that level of extreme is pointless.
But ensuring a child is as safe as possible when doing socially normal things.. is surely the correct approach?
As someone's who's experienced what a frontal collision can do to a child... I'm absolutely not going to risk even a 0.1% additional possibility.
Imagine being responsible for your own family’s safety! Installing a non-isofix seat isn’t hard, it’s just more time consuming.
Why is your life a nightmare with a 7 year old facing backwards? On long journeys they’ll have iPads anyway!
@theone8181 - acceleration is ok, it’s the sudden deceleration that’s the problem!
Everyone is free to make their own choices and assessment of the evidence of course! In my mind rear facing is clearly safer!
Even in a Model S in Insanity Mode... my sons head does not jolt forward like you suggest.
Yes it moves, but he compensates accordingly.
In a frontal collision.. there is no time to compensate. Its down to 0 very quickly and that snaps necks.
Think about your posts a little.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,816
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
I guess it must stunt growth too as my 2 year old (3 in September) is 105CM. His legs are too big for rear facing.
People here talk about having them in a rear facing seat till 7. Lol my daughter was in booster way before then and by 8 was sitting in a seat without any aid although she stayed in the back till she was older.
Plus spinal injuries in children is near enough the same as adults in terms of outcome and recovery. The huge risk is when they are babies. After six months to a year it is fine.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,447
You must have it in chill mode then as I believe there's vids of people being held in place by the acceleration. Ive only got a lowly model 3 performance, but it can still pin you back. I get physics (it's what my degree is in), and I know its all about has quickly/slowly the energy is disapated. Ultimately its a choice, and I don't believe the large discomfort is offset by the small chance of a crash (think about how many times you drive vs how many times youve had a crash at a speed that would be fatal for a forward facing child). I know what the statistics say, but I'm going with the more likely injury which in my mind is from acceleration not deceleration (my thinking being that I read the road pretty well and try to avoid getting into these situations). Also I strongly disagree that parenting affects how well behaved a child is in terms of front/rear facing. Critical all you want but everyone is entitled to an opinion, its one of the benefits to free speech.
Just put of interest when do you plan on taking them out of rear facing (this is a general question for people not just you), and where do you draw the line 6, 7, 10, 15? Reading up on it is a bit vague, and I can't imagine even my son sitting backwards, he'd end up choking on his knees. I know some of the European countries are keen on it upto a certain age, but I just keep thinking that everything someone hits something, chances are it's a car so you be getting similar forces except in the opposite direction (obviously car mass will come into play and crumble zones and the fact that it's a very inelastic collision). I'm also ignoring the fact that at high speeds car seats are going to do very little anyway (on both sides).
Last edited: