Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

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.

Has anyone got Concord Ultimax?

17 replies

SuzysZoo · 09/06/2010 11:59

I am thinking of getting this car seat and using it rear-facing initially and then forward. As my little girl is quite small, I was wondering how long it would last rear-facing. Has anyone used this seat for extended rear-facing until 13kg?
Thanks
suzy
PS - The latest from the Essex in car Safety Centre seems to be that they don't recommend the rear-facing 9kg plus seats!

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
nicm · 09/06/2010 13:50

have no experience of these seats but for that money you could buy a proper erf seat. my britax two way elite was £185.

nicm · 09/06/2010 13:50

have no experience of these seats but for that money you could buy a proper erf seat. my britax two way elite was £185.

Tangle · 10/06/2010 21:26

Suzys - please can you elaborate on why the team in Essex don't recommend RF Grp 1 seats? I've talked to them about it quite a bit in the past and they've always seemed extremely pro them to me - if things have changed I'd be very interested to know why! Thanks

In answer to the question re. the Concord, we had if or DD after she outgrew her infant carrier at 7 months. She fitted in at fine at about 14 months (about 10.5kg) but she wasn't happy - a few months later we bought a BeSafe IziKid in which she's still happy to travel (now 3 yrs 2 months and 16kg). I think she felt lacking in leg room and/or was bored (the way the Concord sat in our car she couldn't see out of the windows while RF).

SuzysZoo · 10/06/2010 21:33

The Essex in car Safety Centre website no longer has any rear-facing seats and this is taken from their website.....
Please note that what follows is not my own opinion and I am just quoting so don't shoot the messenger!!!

Eurotest crash test results confirm that these seats are no safer than the better front facing seats.
In consequence claims that these seats are "5 times safer" appear to be totaly unfounded.
It can be argued with some justification that Scandinavian accident statistics are better than ours purely because of the size & brands of cars that they drive.
Retailers find it significantly more difficult to fit a rear facing stage 2 seats than a forward facing seats.
If sold second hand the risks of these seats being fitted in a dangerous manner are considerable.
Unless you have a very large car these seats are likely to impact on either the drivers seat or the front passengers seat.
Reports suggest that children do not enjoy traveling in these type of seats.
They are expensive.
As far as we can find out, these seats are NOT tested in high speed rear impact crash tests. A rear impact in these seats is the same as a head on accident in a front facing seat.
Only "specialist fitters" are trained to fit these seats and research clearly shows that parents are not specialists.
They are incredibly difficult to move from car to car.
Is that not enough reasons why you should not buy one?

OP posts:
BertieBotts · 10/06/2010 21:44

That is carseatinfo.co.uk though - I always thought they had slightly dodgy advice on car seats anyway. Look at the first sentence on the page about 9mth-4yr carseats: "Once Baby reaches that magical 9kg/20lbs they can be transferred into a group 1 (forward facing) child seat."

Surely this isn't actually the website for the Essex In Car Safety Centre, a big advocate for RF Group 1 seats?

Also the grammar on that site is awful, so again I find it hard to take it seriously, though I realise that it might just be budget constraints.

BertieBotts · 10/06/2010 21:49

Look, that website isn't the website of the In Car Safety Centre at all - it's owned by a retailer called Kidex. It just happens to be the first result on google when you type in "Essex In Car Safety Centre". The EICSS doesn't have a website.

HTH

Tangle · 11/06/2010 11:20

This is the independent website for Vicki and Cathy - two of the ladies from the Essex County Council In Car Safety Team. I think it might be quite new though, as lots of the links don't seem to be working at the moment. However, on the front page they say:

"The best way for a child under 4 years old to travel by car is in a rear-facing child seat. This offers the ultimate protection in the event of an impact."

Also, I think I may have incorrectly implied that the Kidex site linked to previously was that of the EICSS - if so I apologise for the confusion

Adventuredad · 11/06/2010 11:51

The quote posted by SuzysZoo might be the most inaccurate information I have seen in years (I know you didn't write it:-) It's amazing what some people will go through to keep kids forward facing and not safe.

  • Rear facing seats are 500% safer, proven by peer reviewed independent research and also real life use in Sweden.
  • Cars in Scandinavian countries are pretty much the same as UK cars
  • RF seats are not "incredibly difficult to move from car to car.". Completely incorrect.
  • Kids are very happy traveling in rear facing seats. I live in Sweden where we keep kids Rf until age 4. If kids were always unhappy we would have a big problem:-)
  • Rear facing save many lives. Sweden has pretty much zero fatalities each year for age 0-6 years in traffic mostly due to rear facing seats.

Amazing what some companies will go to make a buck.....

Adventuredad · 11/06/2010 12:03

Oh, forgot. Concord Ultimax is not a recommended seat since rear facing limit is only 13 kg. That means turning a child forward facing way too early.

/HÃ¥kan
www.carseat.se

Tangle · 11/06/2010 12:10

Just to address some of their other points (again - thanks for posting the info Suzy )

"Eurotest crash test results confirm that these seats are no safer than the better front facing seats. "

  • links to these test results might be nice.

"In consequence claims that these seats are "5 times safer" appear to be totaly unfounded."

  • see above. Without understanding the tests, what they are testing for and how they are being reported that statement could be downright wrong.

"It can be argued with some justification that Scandinavian accident statistics are better than ours purely because of the size & brands of cars that they drive."

  • ditto, background data to support this statement is...?

"Retailers find it significantly more difficult to fit a rear facing stage 2 seats than a forward facing seats."

  • The retailer's and/or safety consultants I've talked to that are prepared to take the time to learn how to install seats (FF or RF) properly don't seem to have a problem!

"If sold second hand the risks of these seats being fitted in a dangerous manner are considerable."

  • IMO this applies equally to FF seats.

"Unless you have a very large car these seats are likely to impact on either the drivers seat or the front passengers seat."

  • We had a RF seat in an Audi A3. DH (6ft) was perfectly happy (and not unsafe) in the front passenger seat.

"Reports suggest that children do not enjoy traveling in these type of seats."

  • What reports? I've seen lots of reports of older children unhappy in Grp 0+ seats, but most reports I've heard of children in RF Grp 1 seats say they're pretty happy there (DD incl - age 3)

"They are expensive."

  • Can't argue with that one, but not all FF seats are cheap (and some of the ones that are I wouldn't touch with a bargepole). If you work out cost per use of 3 years, none of them are that expensive.

"As far as we can find out, these seats are NOT tested in high speed rear impact crash tests. A rear impact in these seats is the same as a head on accident in a front facing seat."

  • My understanding based on stats from the US (I've never managed to find UK equivalents) is that rear impacts are a lot less common than front impacts - and rear impacts tend to have a lot less energy involved. You cannot protect a child equally from both frontal and rear impact - just chose which you would rather have the greater safety for.

"Only "specialist fitters" are trained to fit these seats and research clearly shows that parents are not specialists."

  • Only "specialist fitters" are trained to fit any car seat. Given car safety checks find astonishing proportions of seats to be badly fitted (IIRC its reported as high as 75% in some places), that's an argument against any car seat...

"They are incredibly difficult to move from car to car."

  • In our experience they're not much harder than the infant carrier to move between cars, especially if you buy spare tether straps (if your seat needs them)
BertieBotts · 11/06/2010 19:54

Tangle you didn't say anything I don't think. SuzysZoo was posting information from www.carseatinfo.co.uk and stating that it was the website of the EICSS, when it is not. They seem to have somehow bumped themselves up to the top of google though, because they come up on the front page of google for loads of different car seat related searches. This is alarming as the advice is decidedly dodgy - advocating FF seats as soon as babies turn 9kg, and carrycots (and not just the Britax one) as opposed to proper carseats for newborns. I think they mean well but they seem very misinformed.

An easy mistake to make though, Suzy's Zoo - please don't think I'm having a go at you!

SuzysZoo · 11/06/2010 20:31

Oh - thanks for all that. I am very confused though as the information on the Kidex site seems to indicate that it is run by a couple of people from Essex and I did think that it was the site from the EICSS - sorry for any confusion caused. Still, I can't be the only confused person - they shouldn't be allowed to do that should they?

OP posts:
Adventuredad · 13/06/2010 14:43

Thanks for the nice summary "Tangle"

Tabitha8 · 14/06/2010 13:44

When I go to that website carseatinfo it takes me to a "front page" talking about the Essex In Car Safety Centre. Suzy you are not the only confused person. Me, too.
Anyway, thanks Tangle for the correct website.

SuzysZoo · 15/06/2010 12:32

I have pointed this out to the Essex in Car Safety Centre today and they agree that it is confusing (so I don't feel quite so silly now!). They are thinking that they might ask them to put a disclaimer on that first page that pops up. I have pointed out that they (the website) are very against rear-facing and so Essex may like to distance themselves - let's see.....

OP posts:
SuzysZoo · 16/06/2010 20:50

And for the record, this is what one of the ladies who runs the Essex Centre has said (please note that this is her personal view and not that of The Essex in Car Safety Centre).

The original statement is first, and the rebuttal after......

STATEMENT
Eurotest crash test results confirm that these seats are no safer than the better front facing seats.

ANSWER
You have on many occasions had reason to challenge ?Which?s? views on their test results, I spoke to xxxxx when the scathing reports came out on rear facing seats in ?Which? and he admitted to me that the results printed are for the worst case i.e. a seat that can be used rear and forward; so for the rear facing seats when tested the results printed are for when they are used forward facing. Don?t forget they also mark down for ease of fit but this has no bearing on the safety of the seat.

STATEMENT
In consequence claims that these seats are "5 times safer" appear to be totally unfounded.

ANSWER
Untrue have you looked at the statistics? Do you understand child physiology? Infant carriers are safer because they absorb 95% of the impact, it doesn?t suddenly become safer to be forward facing at 9mths, in a rear facing seat the child?s head neck and spine (the most venerable parts) are held in alignment, but forwards although the body is harnessed what happens to the head (look at the video on ytube)

STATEMENT
It can be argued with some justification that Scandinavian accident statistics are better than ours purely because of the size & brands of cars that they drive.

ANSWER
What utter rubbish, we drive Volvos and Saabs here, and they drive fords there; they are made in the same factory to be sold here and in Sweden. Where did this research come from?

STATEMENT
Retailers find it significantly more difficult to fit a rear facing stage 2 seats than a forward facing seats.

ANSWER
Retailers find it difficult to fit any seat!!! It?s a matter of training, I know I?m considered an ?Expert? but I find it just as easy to fit either type, it?s simply a matter of being shown. Who have you spoken to?

STATEMENT
If sold second hand the risks of these seats being fitted in a dangerous manner are considerable.

ANSWER
No more so than a forward facing seat! Any second hand seat could be considered dangerous perhaps more so forward facing as the child is not cradled into the seat.

STATEMENT
Unless you have a very large car these seats are likely to impact on either the driver?s seat or the front passenger?s seat.

ANSWER
What evidence do you have to show this? We have fitted these seats into ford KA?s do you consider that a large car.

STATEMENT
Reports suggest that children do not enjoy traveling in these types of seats.

ANSWER
What reports? Who did they ask? Children do not like to be harnessed into the seats! So would that be a good reason not to use the harness. As adults we make decisions for our children to keep them safe, sometimes they may not like our choices but we are the adults after all!! Incidentally I have not heard of anyone saying they object, Swedish children don?t mind and if it?s the way they have always traveled they don?t know any difference
.
STATEMENT
They are expensive.

ANSWER
The prices start at £195 how much is the Jane Exo? £229 oh of course the Exo is ISOfix always more expensive you can buy the Recaro Polaric for just over £200 have you looked at the Family fix for Maxi Cosi with the Pearl Group 1 seat the base and seat would set you back £320 hardly a bargin.

STATEMENT
As far as we can find out, these seats are NOT tested in high speed rear impact crash tests. A rear impact in these seats is the same as a head on accident in a front facing seat.

ANSWER
No seat is tested in a high speed rear crash (It?s not a real test) in a forward impact the speeds of the vehicles are added together in a rear impact the opposite is true, so if one car is traveling at 30mph and it hits another at the same speed the impact speed is 60mph! How many vehicles on the road do you know of that reverse at 60mph!!! A front impact is always more severe and more common, no-one is protected from all impacts we can only guard against the worst case scenario!

STATEMENT
Only "specialist fitters" are trained to fit these seats and research clearly shows that parents are not specialists.

ANSWER
So if the ?specialist fitter? shows the parent the correct way of fitting they will more likely to get it right get it right. It?s all about the training and the motivation to get it right, most of the parents I meet with the right information get it correctly fitted. How many rear facing seats have you checked and found to be wrong.

STATEMENT
They are incredibly difficult to move from car to car.

ANSWER
No there not! If you get tethers fitted into all the cars the seat will be fitted into there is no difference and if the seat is ISOfix it doesn?t use tethers so is no different to fitting a forward facing seat

OP posts:
Mdon · 03/10/2014 14:14

I came to this site looking for reviews for the concord ultimax 2 (ISO fix) and after reading the above message for a "expert" from Essex in car safety centre I had to join to put something right.

A car travelling at 30mph has a head on with a car travelling towards it also at 30mph has a closing speed of 60mph, true, however at the point of impact it is still only a 30mph crash as the two cars cancel the speed out. So hitting a wall at 30mph has a and hitting another car coming towards you at 30mph will have the same effect and damage. Hence why all crash tests (except volvo) crash cars into walls.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page