The guy at Halfords told us that if we put DD into stage 1 carseat at 6months we risk her neck being broken??! Is this right?

[StreetcarNamedDesire]

OK, we went out today to buy the next stage car seat as my brother needs our 1st stage carseat as his first baby is due in March.

Halfords state that the next stage is from 9 months, but weight is 20lbs upwards. DD is a big baby at just under 20lbs at 6 months so we thought we'd be ok.

But the guy at Halfords said it's done on age not weight, and she needs to be capable of sitting unsupported before going into the next stage (forward facing) otherwise if she's in an accident her neck could get broken if she couldn't support it?

Am I being a bit dim here, surely it doesn't make a difference whether she can support her head or not (she can, but still needs some support to sit upright) as in an accident it's not like she'll get time to brace?

Would appreciate anyone's thoughts on this, my brother is travelling 400 miles to visit and we were planning on giving him the pram & carseat complete, if not we're going to have to make another journey to visit him in Feb!

Mothercare told me that had to be 20lbs AND 12 months before they could sell me a stage 1 car seat. It is actually recommended that they stay rear facing until 4 years old if possible.

Haven't read whole thread but 1000% definitely do not put her in a forward facing car seat until she has basically become to tall for her current seat. IE> her head/fet come over the top/bottom of the seat.

It's not about being able to brace on impact, it's because if you have a rear bump your DD's head will snap forward and because it lacks strength it wont be a simple (!) case of whiplash it could be much much more serious.

Also you can get seats that go from birth and then morph into forward facing ones (so do both stage 1 & 2 see here

BUT (and note I am not an expert just a nanny that has researched this ALOT). Although these combination seats comply to test standards they are not as safe as some other car seats. If you only drive on 30mph residential roads then the difference is slight IMO but if you intend to do motorway trips, journeys on fast roads, don't have a car with side impact protection etc I personally would not put one of my charges in a combination car seat. I am -probably- possibly being OTT and no doubt will be flamed but I live by the "better safe than sorry" rules of thumb.

Some good brands of car seats are concord, maxi cosi, Britax but some models in those brands are good while others are pants, again IMO. Always look for deep seats, good side impact protection and cushioning around the head more importantly check it fits in your car.

Sorry about rant, car seats are a big bug bear of mine; I really think the UK industry (?) needs serious overhaul!

I used the matrix for both my girls- I thought those clips you attach to 2 seatbelts would make them pretty safe?? I did use it as a rear-facer after about 4/5 mths, though.

Where are you/ your brother? I have a spare maxi-cosi rear-facer which has never been in an accident if it would help you out.

Also I personally think this is a great impartial site here coupled with the testing that which magazine do (which uses a slightly different testing system).

In independent tests by which your Jane Matrix is basically said to have great head support and front crash protection. But side protection is not so good and it is fiddly to fit so chances of it being fitted incorrectly are high which to which means it's more "dangerous" than a seat which they deem easier to fit. If you keep it in your car and are certain you are fitting it properly then this isn't an issue.

Never put it flat when in the car though, it's only intended to be flat when using it as a carry cot (disclaimer: I think).

Be advised that which tests using a slight deviation of the Euro NCAP/Euro test (see here for more info) but IMO the test is stupid as it does not test different vehicles. Best tests to go by are R44 (legal one at the minute which do not test side impact: which look very dramatic is crash tests) and the new NPACS as these consider specific car seats within specific cars. These test also test read impact which to me is more important than side as you're more likely to have front / rear impact then side impact.

So I personally think your car seat is fine but to be double sure I would try and find out from test of my car what side impact is like.

Sorry so long!

look at this thread it has the 2007 which report which said the matrix car seat was very unsafe. also a video here

nappyaddict my understanding of the which tests (only from reading stuff on the net and car seat specific forums -god- -i- -am- -sad-) is that they do not consider the car. They test all car seats in the same car so obviously that is a bit dim! They also (I think) don't do front/back collisions so I'm not sure if that you tube link is accurate? Again not sure and don't want you to think I'm trying to pick an argument

Britax First Class Si would be ideal. My DD rear faced in hers until she was 2, then we just switched her round. It still fits at nearly 4yrs old.

Which? tests are much more comprehensive than the legal minimum. Manufacturers do not use a real car - they use something called a test bench. Which? use a real car and crash test dummies to see exactly how a child's body would move in a crash.

They say:

"Which? tests the child car seats in two crash simulations: a front crash, equivalent to a head-on collision at around 40mph, and a side crash. The side crash reproduces what would happen if someone were to drive into the side of your car, simulating an impact speed of around 17.5mph.

"Both tests use information taken from EuroNCAP car crash tests, which give an accurate indication of a 'real-life' accident. We measure the effect of these crashes on the child, including an assessment of the support offered to the child?s head.

"We propel a Vauxhall Astra car body down a track, stopping it sharply and filming the effects on the dummy in the seat. Our dummies are wired up to record the head, neck, chest and pelvic loads, accurately indicating what chances a real child would have in similar circumstances."

The legal test before seats go on sale is only done on a test bench and only at 30mph. Which tests have shown seats that appear to be fine at 30mph can disintegrate at 40mph.

The legal test does not inlcude any check of how easy the seat is to use - yet we know many seats are not correctly installed, which can cause them to fail in a crash. Which? checks whether each seat is easy to install and adjust in a range of cars and looks carefully at how clear the instructions are.

It's a bit much to criticise Which? for using a car when manufacturers only use a test bench!

The Jane Matrix Cup doesn't do well in Which? tests. It got a score of only 38 per cent, with four stars (out of five) for front-end crash protection but only three for side-impact. There are 22 seats good enough to be Which? Best Buys and this isn't one of them.

"We weren't very impressed with this baby seat. Although it gives good front crash protection and excellent head support, side crash protection isn't great, and it's not very user friendly.

"Installation is complicated and the belt routing is awkward, so there's a fairly high chance of fitting it incorrectly. The buckle system is hard to master too.

"This seat isn't particularly comfortable either, as the padding is rather hard, although it does provide good leg support. The seat has a good quality of finish, but the covers aren't easy to remove or clean. In addition, the child's view is restricted.

"You can fit this seat to a variety of Jane pushchairs.

"Pros: Excellent head support

"Cons: Complicated to use, danger of incorrect installation, hard to clean

pantomime you said you used to work for which. do you know if they tested the jane matrix in a sitting up position aswell as the lying flat position?

why dont you get a 0+ seat . The ones that go rear facing now and turn around later
like this

obviously not that exact one as it may not fit your car and i havent checked teh safety info but you get teh idea

the best sort is one that goes up to 25kg.

here

here

I don't know, I'm afraid, nappy. But I wouldn't use it lie-flat in in the car if I were you, having seen the film where the two (other) lie flat models disintegrated a year or two back. They've never found a lie flat model that has offered adequate protection until this new Britax one.

The serious issues seem to be lack of side impact protection and difficulty of installing it - a car seat that isn't fitted properly may well fail in a crash so it will have been marked down on that.

pantomimEDAMe - Lots of people would disagree that the which?/Euro test is the best. Also the which scoring is stupid as it places a lot of weight on incorrect fitting.

IMO the OPs car seat is fine but I would want to investigate what side protection the car offers.

do you know if they tested the mutsy lie flat one? it doesn't go across the back seat like the matrix it lies back on one seat with the back bit behind the front seat iyswim.

My DD is in a rearward facing Britax seat, this should last her until she's approx 4 years old.

Rearward is much safer than front facing.

Have a look at this link www.rearfacing.co.uk

Forgive me if I'm being very dim, but how could a 4 year old sit in a rear facing car seat, surely their legs would be bent up round their ears

The rear facing seats for children are different form the baby ones.

My dd1 was rear facing until she was 3.6 (she is very tall) and she was fine in it. In fact, we had to change her seat for a different reason altogether - she still fitted into it fine.

The seats sit higher up, and there was plenty of room for even dd1's massive feet (was a size 9 at 3 )

They are much safer rearfacing. I just wish the seats were easier to get hold of in the UK

pantomimEDAMe your posts says ""We propel a Vauxhall Astra car body down a track"

what's the point in testing a car seat in an Astra that isn't designed for an astra? That is the main reason the which tests are criticised. Also side impacts are not accurate, they are in fact completely flawed IMVHO as depends on the car the car seat is in - not the actual car seat. Ie - number of doors car has, where seat belt feed is, where car seat is position; all these factors play a role that the crash "test" that which? use can not compensate for. The standard R44 test is IMVO opinion much much better precisely because it uses a test bench rather than one model of a car.

The best at they stand at the moment is probably the NPACS "because unlike Eurotest they to will test correctly by using a "average" car. To do this NPACS has taken criteria from a huge number of cars and worked out cushion densities, angles, heights, pitch etc so to ensure the testing procedures are both known and fair. "

There are 4 different testing methods for car seats in Europe - that is \what is shocking and should be changed so that results can be more accurate.

Is the standard test you refer to the one that tests at 30? Because Which? has found seats that pass the standard tests at 30 that do very badly at 40.

I'm not convinced by the idea of an 'average' car - does anyone actually drive an 'average' car? As a consumer, I want to know if my child's car seat is safe in the real world, not on a test bench or in a theoretical average car.

120cm 6 year old rear facing

OP - I have just bought one of these:

www.kiddicare.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/productdisplayA_0_10751_-1__52358_10001_

It can face both directions...

Tell your brother to buy his own seat. It isn't safe.

So many of these car seat threads seem to assume that money is no object. The OP's brother is on a limited budget and needs a seat, her DD will soon have grown out of her's.

In real life there have to be trade-offs where safety is concerned. It is not just the car seat that is at issue - but the model of car and the competence of the driver. More than any other factor, risk to a baby is probably determined by the amount of time they spend in the car, and the roads in their area.