Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Car seats

Confused about car seat regulations? Find baby car seat advice here. For Mumsnetter-approved essentials, sign up for Mumsnet Swears By emails here.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

£125 vs £25 car seats- what is the actual difference?

36 replies

lelarose · 09/05/2011 20:48

I see Asda are selling car seats for 9 month+ for £25 and kiddicare,com have ones at £36, etc. And the ones in mother care cost £125 odds. Just wondering what is the actual difference? Obviously am prepared to pay more if they are safer, but surely they all have to comply to certain safety standards?

Has anyone experience of the cheaper ones?

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

stegosauras · 09/05/2011 20:50

If you pay more like £190 for an extended rearfacing seat then that will be 5 x safer than a ff seat.

PelvicFloorsOfSteel · 09/05/2011 20:53

I think in the which report a £40 came out best, some of the expensive ones you pay for a brand name not a safer seat.

RitaMorgan · 09/05/2011 20:57

Agree rear facing are safer, but can't see there can be too much difference between a cheap forward facing and an expensive forward facing.

Paschaelina · 09/05/2011 21:02

If the cheap unknown company who make the good £40 seat made an extended RF seat, they'd clean up.

Wonder if they've considered it?

JarethTheGoblinKing · 09/05/2011 21:03

They last longer

ANTagony · 09/05/2011 21:15

Some things vary seat to seat and not necessarily with price. The seat you mention at Asda I think is the stage 2 (9months ish +)? Some seats at this stage have a detachable harness and loops to take the adult seatbelt which takes them to the next development stage and hence makes them last longer. Some not only have a removable harness but also a removable back so they become a booster seat. I had a quick look at the Asda one and I'm not sure its suitable for use with a seatbelt for the next stage (I'm prepared to be corrected if wrong).

Some appear to have better side impact protection and are more wrap around others are quite flat. The added bonus of the more wrap around seats and ones with adjustable head height support is if you have a sleeper it stops what I call 'head fallen off syndrome' when they've fallen into a deep sleep and their head is lolling around unsupported.

To an extent it also varies with the shape of your child. Some wrap arounds all singing and dancing may offer the later stage options but if your child is not slight of frame you may have to buy a bigger seat anyway.

Then there is fit in the car. Some of the really big framed seats don't fit in all cars and its not always just small cars.

I don't think that the most expensive are the best but sometimes the cheapest aren't necessarily a bargain - if they lack versatility.

LaWeasel · 09/05/2011 21:16

Rear facing are not necessarily safer. Which (the british independent testing company) doesn't rate them because they can be confusing and difficult to fit, and an incorrectly fitted seat isn't safe.

No, more money doesn't necessarily mean anything. Lasting longer is bullshit. The 'best before' date on all car seats is around 6years I believe?

I'd recommend paying the £1 for a months' subscription to which and you can have a good read yourself.

stegosauras · 09/05/2011 21:20

A correctly fitting rf seat is 5 x safer than a correctly fitting ff seat.

If you buy a rf seat get it fitted correctly and it will be 5 x safer than a ff seat. And waaaaaay safter than an incorrectly fitted ff seat.

K999 · 09/05/2011 21:26

£100

LaWeasel · 09/05/2011 21:27

Erm yes, but correctly fitting a forward facing seat is generally piss easy. You can also be shown how to do it at halfords and have confidence in yourself that you are doing it right.

I would never consider a rf seat because
a) They are much much too expensive for us. If you don't have £400 to spend on a car seat you don't have £400 to spend on a car seat.
b) We have to move DDs car seat a lot, which means the seat has to easily fit a lot of different cars, including the rear of my dad's double cab pick up truck (fair to say a massive rear facer doesn't have a cats chance in hell of fitting)
c) They won't even fit in our actual car, and the idea of buying a different one to make it fit... please see point a.

Original poster

lelarose · 09/05/2011 21:37

Thank you all- I am a first time mother of a six month old and so far have been using a rear facing maxi cosi cabriofix- I thought that the 9 months plus ones were ok to be front facing though?

pelvicfloors- have you any idea what the £40 one that which recommended is? (I am not really too tight to pay £1 to find out, just thought it would be quicker if anyone already knew)

OP posts:

stegosauras · 09/05/2011 21:40

Ok, laweasel.

I'm sorry it won't fit in your car, but with regards to your other points, we have the britax two way elite which costs £190, not £400. It is very easy to fit.

However, if you aren't able to fit the two way elite with a seatbelt my friend has an extended rear facing car seat which is fitted with isofix which is about as difficult to fit as....a forward facing seat with isofix.

HTH

nocake · 09/05/2011 21:42

Avoiding the arguments over rear facing v front facing... unfortunately there are no published figures for the performance of car seats. Apparently the figures do exist because the seats have been tested but they aren't released to the public. I've no idea why, probably under pressure from car seat manufacturers who don't want us to know that, for example, a £60 seat is safer than a £120 seat.

So, until the information is available there is no way to know how good the seats from Asda or Kiddicare are. They meet the minimum standards but they may, or may not, be better than a £125 seat.

stegosauras · 09/05/2011 21:45

"I thought that the 9 months plus ones were ok to be front facing though?"

They are legal, they are just not as safe. If you're happy to spend more for something safer, as you said in your op, then it is worth CONSIDERING a rearfacing seat, if it will fit in your car (which most do).

My rearfacing seat certainly isn't a hulking great thing - it fit just fine in the back of my titchy Polo).

More info here

LaWeasel · 09/05/2011 21:47

We don't use Isofix either. I'm not happy with the test results, design principle and that it stops the seat belts from working properly.

I did come on this thread to have a row about rear facing seats, since the people that answer these threads generally love them.

Just to try and make sure the OP knows that a normal cheap(er) car seat will have passed very stringent safety tests and may well be the best option for your family, so don't feel bad or like you're putting your baby at risk.

stegosauras · 09/05/2011 21:53

Why are you being so aggressive laweasel? I'm not attacking your choices, I'm just suggesting to the OP that since she's prepared to pay more for a safer seat then rf is worth considering.

If the OP watches the crash test video on the link and sees the potential effect of a front impact collision on her BABY'S neck in a ff seat she might choose a rf seat.

Or she might not.

But I, for one, am very happy that I learned about extended rf seats through mumsnet and I don't see the issue in sharing that information.

LaWeasel · 09/05/2011 22:00

I'm sorry,

It's really not a big deal, but sentences like this make me see red:
If the OP watches the crash test video on the link and sees the potential effect of a front impact collision on her BABY'S neck in a ff seat she might choose a rf seat.

Not all of the research about rearfacing seats has come out so resoundingly in there favour. Everytime this is mentioned this is brushed away like it's irrelevant.

It's not. Incorrect installation of seats is a huge deal, and given that so many car seats are fitted incorrectly shouldn't be ignored.

If the OP wants to pay more and she buys into rear facing seats that's fine, she can buy whatever car seat she likes. But reading something like Which's reports which are INDEPENDENT is going to be a lot more informative about which car seat is actually safest/most suitable/at a good price for their family.

Than having a dozen people pile on a tell her rf is the only safe option. Because when you come out with sentences like those above, that is exactly the impression you're giving.

stegosauras · 09/05/2011 22:02

I give up laweasel.

I haven't brushed anything under the carpet - you've said rf car seats are only safer if they're fitted correctly and I've said SO GET THEM FITTED CORRECTLY.

But you're arguing still? Why? I agree that they need to be fitted correctly!!!!

stegosauras · 09/05/2011 22:07

Why do you see red, out of interest?

Do you really think ff seats aren't fitted incorrectly? Even though recent surveys have estimated that 80% of ALL car seats are fitted incorrectly?

LaWeasel · 09/05/2011 22:10

I think rf seats are more likely to be fitted incorrectly becaus eth instructions are complicated, and they often have to be ordered from abroad which means you are working it all out yourself instead having a trained fitter explaining it to you.

I am perfectly happy to except that ff seats, correctly fitted, are safer, but on the same note that a lot of rf fans are not prepared to take the risk in buying a slightly less safe seat (you can quote 5 times safer but the stats for death/injury from a child who is wearing a seat belt - full stop irrelevant of it being the right size/stage for them, are so collosally improved that the improvements become almost negligable) I am not prepared to take the risk of fitting a seat incorrectly.

stegosauras · 09/05/2011 22:30

With all due respect laweasel, I'm not asking you to do anything.

I'm asking the OP to consider getting a correctly fitted rf car seat, if she is able to.

OP, if you are anywhere near Milton Keynes the incarsafetycentre can advise and fit a seat for you. They can also demonstrate how to fit it yourself - it really isn't complicated at all, and I can say that as someone who HAS one.

PelvicFloorsOfSteel · 09/05/2011 23:04

OP - sorry but it was a long time ago I read the which report and I only ever had a trial subscription so can't see it any more, I remember being surprised the £40 seat came out best but can't remember the brand name.

JarethTheGoblinKing · 10/05/2011 00:37

Blardy hell.. another FF vs RF debate when the op asked a simple question

sazm · 10/05/2011 12:28

there are cheaper seats which are pretty good,
if you can afford a rearfacing seat then its def worth looking at,
the asda one at £25 is ok,but doesnt have much side impact protection or padding and its a a very small and low down seat in comparison to our £70 britax eclipse.
we bought a £200 recaro for our first son,and loved it until it started falling apart and then i read the which tests - they rated it as one of their 'dont buy' seats.i was gutted.
we went for the eclipse as we already have had a few britax seats which we have been happy with,but our main reason was that its a narrow seat and we need to fit 3 seats in the back.
kiddicare have one which looks good too here it can be used rearfacing until 13kgs (same as the cabrio but is more spacious),it looks much better than the asda one (you can also return it if it doesnt fit your car)

TruthSweet · 10/05/2011 16:19

sazm - that seat is a group 0/1 not a group 0+/1. It only rear faces to 9kg as do the Nania combination seats (the most usual other cheap seats on the market).

Flip

1 2