Consumer Reports has developed a new crash test that offers consumers comparative performance information on which car seats could provide an additional margin of safety when compared with other models within the same ratings group that have been subjected to the same test protocol. Our Crash Protection Ratings are based on injury criteria measured on standardized child-size dummies, contact of the dummy’s head with the back of a simulated front seat and a car seat’s ability to remain intact during the course of testing. Consumer Reports’ new crash tests are not designed to check whether a seat complies with current federal car seat safety standards. Rather, the purpose of our new tests is to differentiate the seats’ performance on a scale that ranks the performance of tested seats ranging from “basic” to “best.” Our focus on providing an “extra margin” of safety, rather than on determining whether a seat is safe or not, is based on the fact that any car seat sold in the U.S. already must provide an essential level of safety under the government standards. The new test conditions were carefully designed to simulate the interior environment and forces encountered during a crash in contemporary vehicles. Changes from the way that convertible seats were rated previously include using a test bench that better simulates the vehicle seat design from a contemporary vehicle, with more representative cushion stiffness and seat geometry and incorporation of a “blocker” to simulate a front seatback. The new test also runs at a higher 35mph speed, with other representative dynamic characteristics that better simulate the behavior of contemporary vehicles during a crash.
As part of Consumer Reports’ car seat evaluation program, CR conducts its own simulated frontal crash tests. In 2 of 2 forward-facing tests, one each with the Hybrid III (HIII) 6-year-old and weighted HIII 6-year-old, installed with the 3pt belt and top tether, the metal latch between the CRS shell and base deforms and releases. This allows the shell to rotate forward about the lower retention bar, significantly increasing the forward head excursion and resulting in head contact with the simulated front seatback.
Additionally in 2 of 3 forward-facing tests with the HIII 3-year-old installed with the 3pt belt and top tether, the headrest adjustment track breaks which allows the headrest to completely disengage during the loading phase of the event. Because of the harness position, this disengagement results in minimal harness payout. However, this structural issue occurring with the 3-year-old, which represents the age for typical forward-facing use, is considered significant.
While both dummy and the CRS remain retained post-test, there is concern for increased injury risk in a subsequent crash event in both test conditions.
An additional concern was also observed in our ease-of-use and fit-to-vehicle evaluations. With the CRS shell positioned in the rear-facing position on the base, the seat fails to stay locked and can be rotated without use of the rotate release on the base. The seat does remain locked when the shell is positioned forward-facing.
