All posts by Mike

Do adults need to use seat belts in the back seat for safety? Yes!

The laws of physics don't stop in the front row.If all aren't restrained, all are at risk.
The laws of physics don’t stop in the front row.If all aren’t restrained, all are at risk.

Many adults who see themselves as safety-minded drivers often forget that the rules of physics apply equally when they drive and when they’re simply passengers in moving vehicles. Specifically, it’s easy to forget that you need to wear seat belts when you use taxis, Ubers, and Lyfts, or that children need to use car seats and seat belts even on short trips in your neighborhood. Today we’re going to look at why adults wear seat belts less frequently when they’re back seat passengers, which risks they pose to other occupants, and whether or not our laws are encouraging better habits or enabling poorer ones. Buckle up!

Most adults use seat belts, but are more likely to ride unbuckled in the back

It doesn't matter who or where you are. If you're in a car, you need to be buckled up. And so does everyone else.
It doesn’t matter who or where you are. If you’re in a car, you need to be buckled up. And so does everyone else.

As you might have guessed from the title of this article, there are a significant number of adults who aren’t wearing seat belts whenever they travel in vehicles. Observations of belt use in 2015 suggested 89% of drivers and front-seat passengers use seat belts (which is good, but still less than in a number of fellow wealthy countries in Europe and Asia). However, only 75% of adults who sat in the backs of vehicles were observed to use seat belts. In other words, in a car with 4-5 adults, on average, at least 1 will be unbelted. This is quite dangerous; we’ll go into why in a moment.

A 2016 IIHS phone survey revealed similar numbers; while 91% of adult respondents claimed to use seat belts every time they sat in the front row, only 72% stated they did the same whenever they sat in a rear row. The numbers are slightly different from the 2015 observation, but they’re close enough to be judged as equal. The key point is that while roughly 9 out of 10 adults will buckle up when driving or shotgunning, only 7 out of 10 will when sitting in the back.

What kinds of risks are they running?

Big ones. And not just for themselves, but for everyone unfortunate enough to ride with them.

One unbuckled passenger can spell death for everyone else in a vehicle

Per previous studies, unbelted back-seat passengers increase the risks of serious injury and death for front-row drivers and passengers, even if those occupants are wearing seat belts. Similarly, unbelted occupants–wherever they are–increase the risks of injury and death for adjacent belted occupants. It’s estimated that an unbelted occupant increases death risks for all vehicle occupants by 40 percent. And if you’re a belted driver with an unbelted passenger behind you, your risks of dying in a crash shoot up by 137 percent.

Why aren’t adults wearing seat belts in the back seats, and which adults are least likely to buckle up?

Per the IIHS telephone survey, 35 to 54 year-old adults were least likely to use seat belts when traveling in the back seat; their percentage of compliance was at 66 percent, significantly lower than the 73 percent of adults between 18 and 34 and 76 percent of age 55 and older adults. Beyond these demographics, men were less likely to use seat belts than women, as were less educated individuals (those without college educations).

On top of these results, the status of the vehicle made a huge difference: only 57 percent of rear-seat passengers in taxis, Ubers, limousines, and similar hired vehicles reported always using seat belts, while this number jumped to 74 percent of rear-seat passengers traveling in personal, non-hired vehicles. As I’ve noted earlier, it’s essential to use seat belts and car seats in taxis, and there are many taxi / Uber fatalities each year involving unbelted passengers. Perhaps the most famous of the last twenty years was Princess Diana. There are no second chances with death.

When asked to provide reasons for not using seat belts, the primary reason provided was a mistaken perception that rear seats were safer than front seats, rendering seat belts unnecessary. This, of course, is incorrect. Adults also responded that they didn’t have a habit of using seat belts, that they forgot to do so, or that they never or rarely used them. Some adults claimed they found seat belts uncomfortable, while a few said they could not find them when they wanted to use them. Overall, the majority of responses were either tied to safety ignorance or deliberate seat belt refusal.

Do our laws encourage best practices or enable irresponsibility?

If we’re asking this question in a country that’s been raising speed limits in state after state while most countries have been decreasing them, the answer’s not going to come as much of a surprise. While 49 of the 50 states require front-row seat belt use (New Hampshire does not), only 29 states do so for rear passengers. Federalism fails again! Much as each state gets to set its speed limits, all the way from reasonable (Hawaii at 60 mph) to super-crazy (parts of Texas at 85 mph) or each state gets to decide that 1 is good enough for rear-facing, each state gets to decide whether or not it’s necessary for back seat passengers to use seat belts, or whether the laws of physics only apply to front-seat occupants. This is also a factor in the wildly disparate rates of per capita fatalities across the US. Some states are simply safer than others. Of the 29 non-crazy states that believe all occupants in a moving vehicle should be somewhat restrained, only 20 of them use primary enforcement, or allow police to stop drivers for seat belt non-compliance. In the other 9, it’s a secondary offense, which means police need additional reasons to stop vehicles besides seat belt-related ones. Nationally, 30 states use primary enforcement while 18 rely on secondary enforcement.

Our laws are a reflection of our society’s values. We don’t really value seat belt use for adults. Considering that they reduce the odds of death by about 50% in a serious crash and we lose around 35,000 individuals a year in auto deaths with most of them traveling in passenger vehicles, it’s not hard to see how we’re leaving thousands of lives on the table–or rather, allowing thousands to end needlessly. Per the NHTSA, 13,941 lives were likely saved by seat belts in 2015, and 2,800 more could have been saved with full compliance.

If you find my information on best practices in car and car seat safety helpful, you can buy my books here or do your shopping through this Amazon link. Canadians can shop here for Canadian purchases. Have a question or want to discuss best practices? Send me an email at carcrashdetective [at] gmail [dot] com.

There is No Safe Amount of Alcohol You Can Drink Before Driving

Partying is fun. Drinking before driving is not. Even one drink before getting behind the wheel makes you more likely to kill yourself or someone else--long before you reach the legal limit.
Partying is fun. Drinking before driving is not. Even one drink before getting behind the wheel makes you more likely to kill yourself or someone else–long before you reach the legal limit.

One of the persistent myths related to alcohol and driving, particularly in the US, is that drinking before driving is okay as long as you take certain precautions. Some people believe those precautions are not drinking too much; others believe in eating certain foods or drinking certain things in addition to alcohol, or spacing out drinks or driving slowly or listening to loud music or splashing themselves with cold water or…the myths are endless.

The US and Canadian Limit of .08 g/dL is Already Too High

Just one drink is enough to make you a poorer driver. Would you bet your life--or that of a loved one--on those odds?
Just one drink is enough to make you a poorer driver. Would you bet your life–or that of a loved one–on those odds?

Unfortunately, none of them are true. There is no safe amount of alcohol you can drink before driving. My definition of “safe” involves an amount of wine, beer, champagne, whiskey, liquor, hard lemonade, or any other alcoholic beverage you could consume and remain as competent of a driver in the next several hours as you would have been had you not had that amount of alcohol. In the US, the law states you can consume up to .08 grams of alcohol per deciliter of blood (known as the Blood Alcohol Concentration, or BAC, as measured by g/dL) as long as you’re over 21. However, this limit is far too high, as evidenced by the fact that approximately 1/3rd of all fatal car crashes in the US are linked to alcohol, and have been so consistently since the 1970s.

Blood Alcohol Concentration Effects Below .08 g/dL – What happens before you’re legally drunk?

The .08 limit doesn’t work; by that point, you’re long past the point of being a safe driver. Let’s take a look at what alcohol does to your body and driving abilities before you reach .08 of alcohol concentration.

.02 – You’re going to lose your judgment to some degree. This might mean saying things you ordinarily wouldn’t or doing things you normally wouldn’t with people you normally wouldn’t. You might feel more relaxed, a bit warmer, and different in your mood. To a typical person, you might appear more talkative, happier, giddy, or simply less likely to say no. Your concentration’s going to go down. That means you’re more likely to miss things–like whether that light was green or red, or whether that’s a 2-way or a 4-way stop, or whether or not a child just ran out in front of your car.

.04 – Everything above will be happening in earnest. You’re going to start exaggerating your movements, which makes sense because you’re going to have more and more trouble controlling your muscles, especially the fine ones. That might mean having trouble focusing your eyes or holding objects between your fingers. Your judgment will continue to drop, but you’re not going to notice it. That might mean going home with people you wouldn’t–which you’re going to feel good about. You’ll be less inhibited, after all, and less alert. This means your driving’s going to get worse–a lot worse. Things will get harder to track. The steering wheel will get harder to steer. Your braking will take longer. This is the point where people might start suggesting you don’t drive, if you’re lucky.

.06 – Everything above will be happening more and more quickly, and you’ll be responding more and more slowly. Your focus will continue to drop, as will your ability to discern bad ideas from good ones. You’re going to have a lot of trouble remaining faithful–whether to your values or to the people you love. And if you get behind the wheel, you’re going to have trouble staying between lanes, staying within any kind of a speed limit, staying away from moving cars, moving people, sidewalks, and police cars. In short, you’re going to be drunk. However, it’s important to remember that you were already drunk; it’s just going to be more obvious to everyone but you.

By the time you hit the legal limit, you’re already long drunk

None of these levels are against the law in the United States or Canada as long as you’re over 21. But if you’re reading this article while sober, it’s hopefully apparent that none of these levels of inebriation would be remotely safe on the roads. Or to put it more bluntly, if you wouldn’t want to be walking across a crosswalk with your spouse and children while someone barreling down the road with the physical and neurological effects described above, you intuitively understand why those limits, while legal, are unacceptably high.

If a .08 BAC is already far too high to be safe, why is it legal in the United States?

US drinking limits are higher than those almost anywhere else in Europe. Why is that? (Credit: Wikipedia)
US drinking limits are higher than those almost anywhere else in Europe. Why is that? (Credit: Wikipedia)

As is almost always the case when injustice and inequality exist on Earth, it comes down to money. If you visit the NHTSA’s page on drunk driving, you’ll find all sorts of information on the effects of alcohol at .08 BAC and below and statistics on the dangers of drinking and driving. However, what you won’t find is any meaningful advocacy or discussion about lowering the alcoholic limits, or references to how the limits are lower in nearly every other rich country on the planet, and how those countries suffer significantly lower rates of drunk driving (or drink driving, as it’s largely known outside the United States). Look at the map above of European BACs. Why would the US stand out so much?

There’s an awful lot of money tied up in encouraging and distributing alcohol in the US. Companies like Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV (who produce brands like Budweiser, Corona, and Stella Artois) make 45 billion dollars in revenue in the United States every year, and want alcohol in every home and on every occasion. And until we reduce the influence corporations have on our national policies, we’re going to continue to have lots of things that kill lots of people available in lots of places with minimal oversight–including, but not limited to guns, drugs, medication, giant cars, and alcohol.

If you find my information on best practices in car and car seat safety helpful, you can buy my books here or do your shopping through this Amazon link. Canadians can shop here for Canadian purchases. Have a question or want to discuss best practices? Send me an email at carcrashdetective [at] gmail [dot] com.

Is 4WD Really Safer than 2WD? Not Per IIHS Driver Death Rates

4WD doesn't offer any survival advantages whatsoever over 2WD when it comes to the all-important goal of keeping your family alive between Point A and Point B. Focus on how and where you drive instead.
4WD doesn’t offer any survival advantages whatsoever over 2WD when it comes to the all-important goal of keeping your family alive between Point A and Point B. Focus on how and where you drive instead.

One of the most persistent myths about driving in the United States is that four-wheel drive vehicles (4WD) are safer than two-wheel drive (2WD) equivalents. It doesn’t matter whether the vehicles involved are SUVs, crossovers, cars, minivans, pickup trucks, or station wagons–if they’re 4WD, they’ve got to be safer, because four powered wheels means more control, which ultimately means a safer way of getting your loved ones home, right?

Not right.

As with many other elements of best practices, what’s commonly done isn’t necessarily what’s safest. Today we’re going to look at IIHS driver death rate data and review how, in the majority of cases, having 4WD in a vehicle doesn’t make it any more likely to keep you alive than using the same vehicle (or even the same kind of vehicle) in 2WD. The goal here isn’t to make you give up your 4WD SUV; it’s simply to show that it’s not inherently safer than its 2WD equivalent, and that it doesn’t give you any leeway whatsoever with respect to the other two pillars of driving safety—how you drive and where you drive.

Do 4WD SUVs/cars/minivans/pickup trucks have lower driver fatality rates than 2WD vehicles? If not, why not?

No, there isn’t a significant difference in driver death rates between 4WD and 2WD vehicles; this has been shown for years in IIHS driver death rate studies, although the IIHS once erroneously thought that 4WD was safer (see Status Report Volume 46, No. 5, when they split death rate reports by vehicle drive type). They realized their error by the following death-rate-focused status report (Vol. 50, No. 1) and got rid of what was a meaningless way of dividing the data. Let’s look at the most recent survey, Volume 52, No. 3. What follows are various models of minivans, SUVs, cars, and pickup trucks where driver death rate data was available for both 4WD and 2WD trims, as well as confidence intervals in parentheses.

2011-14 Toyota Sienna
4WD – 10 (1-37), 2WD – 9 (2-16).

I wrote specifically about the Sienna when comparing it to the Odyssey here. The 4WD and 2WD driver death rates were statistically identical, as the confidence intervals overlapped between both trims. Both were also statistically indistinguishable from the 2WD Odyssey.

2011-14 Honda Pilot
4WD – 15 (5-25), 2WD – 17 (3-32).

I recently wrote about the Pilot in the context of how neither the 4WD nor 2WD trim had any statistical safety advantages over the 4WD or 2WD trims of the much smaller Honda CR-V. As noted in that article, both trims of the Pilot were also indistinguishable from each other based on driver death rates.

2011-14 Mercedes-Benz E-Class sedan
4WD – 5 (0-26), 2WD – 4 (0-22).

Not many cars outside the luxury market are sold in large numbers in 4WD and 2WD trims; fortunately, the E-Class is a perennial best seller and had enough sales to show, once again, that the 4WD and 2WD trims were statistically identical from a driver survivability perspective. Even the confidence intervals were nearly identical. To put it simply, if you crashed an E-class, it wasn’t because you were in a 4WD or 2WD.

2011-14 Ford F-150 SuperCrew
4WD – 24 (17-31), 2WD – 22 (10-34).

Finally, our token pickup, the F-150, showed again that driver survivability had nothing to do with whether the transmission was 4WD or 2WD. The confidence intervals overlapped again, as they did in all of the examples above, showing that, from a mathematical standpoint, there was no difference in the safety of either trim.

Why aren’t there safety differences between 4WD and 2WD?

The reasons why there aren’t safety differences is because there aren’t any special powers inherent in 4WD transmissions. They’re simply transmissions where all four wheels are powered instead of the front or back two. Once a vehicle is in motion, all four wheels are in motion, powered or not. A 4WD system doesn’t help you steer more accurately or stop more quickly; your steering has to do with the overall geometry of your vehicle, your speed, and the quality of your tires. Your stopping power involves many things (to be discussed below), but none of them have to do with whether you’re driving a 4WD transmission or a 2WD transmission. And as I’ve said many times before, the lion’s share of how safely you drive doesn’t involve what you’re driving, but how and where.

But what about winter driving? Isn’t 4WD safer on snow and ice?

No, it isn’t. The sole advantage of 4WD is, when paired with suitable tires, an increased ability to extricate the vehicle from low-traction situations. This means an improved ability to get moving in mud, slush, snow, and similar wet/dry situations. 4WD will not help you stop any sooner than 2WD in a vehicle matched by road conditions, speed, mass, tire size and tread, and brake quality. Every 4-wheeled vehicle on the road already has 4-wheel braking, and ABS will already do more to stop you than you ever could. Similarly, 4WD will not help you steer; every 4-wheeled vehicle already has 2-wheel steering, and ESC will do more to keep you heading in your intended direction than anything you could ever imagine; that’s what makes it life-saving technology.

What does make a difference for snow / winter driving safety?

Winter tires! They’re specifically designed to work through snow and cold conditions, and this is why a 2WD vehicle with winter tires will almost always be a better choice (as in, 99.9% of the time) than the same vehicle (or nearly any vehicle) in a 4WD configuration and all-season tires. On top of this, avoiding driving through snow, limiting driving when avoiding it is impossible, and driving as slowly as safely possible are the best techniques to get you through winter conditions, independent of vehicle and tire choice.

What about driving through or over ice? What’s the safest vehicle for ice?

Finally, when it comes to ice, there isn’t a safe vehicle out there that doesn’t use caterpillar tracks, and those kinds of vehicles aren’t street legal. Practically speaking, both 4WD and 2WD are equally helpless (or equally capable, if you’re optimistic); ice results in a loss to complete absence of traction, depending on the quality of the ice. The only way to counteract this actively is through studded tires, which are either restricted or banned throughout the United States. Winter tires will be better than all-season tires, but even they won’t provide dry-road equivalent traction on ice. Avoiding it, followed by driving as slowly as possible through it on winter tires, are your best options if you don’t have studded tires. 4WD won’t make any difference for stopping or steering through it.

Does this mean I should never buy a 4WD vehicle again for safety?

No and yes. If you live somewhere with more than 100 inches of snow a year or where the streets may not be plowed for several days or you have a job that doesn’t allow you to take personal days due to unsafe weather, then you might want a 4WD vehicle in addition to winter tires to increase your odds of not getting stuck on the way to or from work (or wherever you need to drive during or after heavy snowfall). However, this describes around 5% of the US population, and that’s being very, very generous. For the vast majority of people, 2WD paired with winter tires will help you handle any part of winter when paired with good judgment.

If you find my information on best practices in car and car seat safety helpful, you can buy my books here or do your shopping through this Amazon link. Canadians can shop here for Canadian purchases. Have a question or want to discuss best practices? Send me an email at carcrashdetective [at] gmail [dot] com.

Why Can’t We Buy 55-Pound Rear-Facing Car Seats in the US Like Sweden?

The Britax Multi-tech III rear-faces from 20 to 55 pounds in Sweden. Why isn't it sold in the US?
The Britax Multi-tech III rear-faces from 20 to 55 pounds in Sweden. Why isn’t it sold in the US?

One of the most interesting facets of car seat safety involves the differences in cultural attitudes toward car seat usage and auto safety overall, which is reflected in the availability of different seats in different regions of the world. For example, Britax regularly sells car seats capable of rear-facing up to 55 pounds throughout Europe, particularly in the UK, Sweden, and Norway. However, they don’t sell any seats capable of rear-facing past 40 pounds in the United States as of November 2017, and this has been the case for years, despite the availability of such 55-pound rear-facing seats overseas for more than a decade. Why is that? And does it really matter? Let’s take a closer look at these questions today.

There’s (almost) no demand for 55-pound rear-facing in the United States

The Britax Two-Way also rear-faces from 20 to 55 pounds in Sweden. But almost no one would buy it if it were available in the US...so it isn't.
The Britax Two-Way also rear-faces from 20 to 55 pounds in Sweden. But almost no one would buy it if it were available in the US…so it isn’t.

The primary reason why 55-pound rear-facing seats aren’t yet available in the United States is because there’s almost no demand for them. Car seat manufacturers don’t stay in business by making seats no one buys; there’s a large demand for rear-facing seats in Sweden and Norway, where most children rear-face until 4 to 5. However, in the United States, where most children are forward-facing by age 2, there’s much less demand for seats that allow kids to rear-face far beyond that.

There are definitely exceptions; as of today, there are 7 convertible car seats that allow children to rear-face until they hit 50 pounds: The Clek Fllo, the Clek Foonf, the Diono Rainier, the Graco Extend2Fit, the Graco Extend2Fit 3-in-1, the Graco 4Ever Extend2Fit, the Nuna Rava, the Safety 1st Advance EX 65 Air+, and the Safety 1st Grow and Go EX Air. However, only one of these existed when I started this blog in 2014, the Clek Foonf. We’ve made progress in raising awareness of the importance of rear-facing, and more parents are doing so in the US than ever before, but it’s still a very, very, very small market here compared to what’s the norm in Sweden.

It’s also important to note that while you can buy Swedish seats and import them to the US to use them with children on this side of the pond, this is illegal because Swedish seats aren’t legal for US use since they aren’t tested by the NHTSA. There are plenty of ways to get around the law if you’re interested in doing so for a number of things in life, but we’re focusing here on why such seats aren’t legally sold in the United States or Canada.

With that in mind, it’s important to note that just because we can’t rear-face past 50 pounds in the United States doesn’t mean our kids are leaving a lot of safety on the table compared to their Swedish siblings. In fact, the best rear-facing seats in the US have a lot in common with the best Swedish ones. Next we’ll take a look at four 55-pound rear-facing Swedish seats.

Which Swedish car seats rear-face until 55 pounds, and how do they compare to American seats?

I recently reviewed the Britax Max-Way II (which rear-faces from 20-55 pounds) and compared it to US convertible seats. It's not that different from the best ones here.
I recently reviewed the Britax Max-Way II (which rear-faces from 20-55 pounds) and compared it to US convertible seats. It’s not that different from the best ones here.

I recently wrote about how one of the most common Swedish rear-facing car seats, the Britax Max-Way, was not that different from extended rear-facing convertibles available in the US (e.g., the Clek Fllo or Diono Rainier). It’s one of four commonly sold 55-pound rear-facing car seats available overseas via Britax; three others are the Britax Hi-Way 2, which succeeded the Britax Hi-Way some years ago, the Britax Two-Way, a much older but still relevant design, and the Britax Multi-Tech III. Three of these seats rear-face from 20-55 pounds while one rear-faces from birth to 55 pounds. None of these seats are available in the US but all are readily available in Sweden and a number of other countries throughout Europe (e.g., via Britax Sweden). The manuals for these seats are typically available in English, Danish, Finnish, Dutch, and Swedish, reflecting sales in the UK, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, and of course, Sweden.

The Britax Hi-Way II is designed to rear-face from 0-55 pounds. However, Britax only sells it in Europe.
The Britax Hi-Way II is designed to rear-face from 0-55 pounds. However, Britax only sells it in Europe.

While all four of these seats may seem far more advanced, sophisticated, and yes, safer, than anything available in the US, it’s essential to note that the Swedes themselves don’t credit the seats with their exceptional safety record for the fewest children lost to car crashes per capita year after year. To the Swedes, the difference comes primarily from rear-facing. Indeed, if you look at the seats more closely, you’ll realize that, practically speaking, you can’t rear-face in them any longer than you can in the best American seats.

Really?

Yes! As with American seats, the usability of Swedish car seats is primarily limited by height instead of by weight, even though seats there, like seats here, are primarily marketed by height.

How long can Swedish car seats actually be used to rear face compared to the best US convertibles?

Want Swedish rear-facing time on a budget? Just get a Graco Extend2Fit--or any of the other 50 pound seats.
Want Swedish rear-facing time on a budget? Just get a Graco Extend2Fit–or any of the other 50 pound seats.

When it comes down to it, you can actually get about as much time rear-facing in the best US convertibles as you can from the best Swedish seats. Let’s compare the four above to some of their closest American counterparts.

The Britax Max-Way is a Group 1/2 seat designed for kids from 9 months to 6 years of age. It rear-faces (and only rear-faces) from 9-25 kg, or 20-55 lbs. It has a height limit of around 120 cm, or 47 inches.

The Britax Hi-Way II is a Group 0/1/2 seat designed for kids from birth to 6. It rear-faces from 0-25 kg, or 0-55 lbs. It has a height limit of around 110 cm, or 43 inches.

The Britax Two-Way is another Group 1/2 seat for kids between 9 months and 6 years. It rear-faces and forward-faces from 9-25 kg, or 20-55 lbs. It has a height limit of 125 cm, or 49 inches.

The Britax Multi-Tech III is a Group 1/2 seat aimed at kids between 9 months and 6 years. It can both rear-face and forward-face between 9-25 kg, or 20-55 lbs. It also has a height limit of 125 cm, or 49 inches.

According to growth charts from the Center for Disease Control (which are the same for girls and boys), a 50th percentile child won’t reach 50 pounds until 7 years and 25 kilograms (55 pounds) until approximately 7 years and 9 months. Height-wise, the child won’t reach 43″ until 5 and 49″ until 7 years and 5 months.

A Clek Fllo will give you the same amount of effective rear-facing time as a Britax Max-Way or Hi-Way II despite having a 50-pound weight limit.
A Clek Fllo will give you the same amount of effective rear-facing time as a Britax Max-Way or Hi-Way II despite having a 50-pound weight limit.

In other words, for a 55 pound seat with a 49″ height limit, height is the limiting factor for a typical child, and it limits a seat to 7 years and 5 months, and a 43″ height limit limits a seat to 5 years. There are several 50-pound seats in the US with 49″ height limits, including the Nuna Rava, the Safety 1st Advance EX 65 Air+, the Graco 4Ever Extend2Fit, the Graco Extend2Fit.  The Diono Rainier tops out at 44″, which a 40th percentile child will reach by 5 years and 5 months. The Clek Fllo and Clek Foonf top out at 43″, which a 50th percentile child will reach by 5.

What this shows is that any of the 50-pound rear-facing seats currently available in the US will allow you to rear-face as long as you can with two of the four most common 55-pound rear-facing seats available in Sweden, and four separate 50-pound US seats sold in the US will match the rear-facing time an average child can get out of the two tallest 55-pound seats sold in Sweden. There are some unique situations (e.g., heavy, short children) where certain kids could potentially get more time from a Swedish seat than an American one by being too heavy for an American seat yet falling within the height limits, but these will be very, very rare situations. Practically speaking, if you want to rear-face until 4 or 5 or even 6 or 7, you don’t need a Swedish seat; you just need to make the most of an American one. Sort of like how you don’t need the newest cars to travel safely.

Does this mean we don’t need 55-pound rear-facing seats in the United States to keep our kids as safe as those in Sweden?

In a word, yes. Their incredibly low rates of child deaths come from a combination of factors including and beyond extended rear-facing, such as their much closer adherence to best practices in road design and driver behaviors than that found in the US. Swedes drive half as often as Americans, which automatically cuts the risk of death for children and adults alike in half. If we want numbers like those seen in Sweden, we can’t just rear-face and call it a day. As with most societal-scale changes, it’ll require societal-scale commitment. And the US shows no sign of lowering speed limits, reducing auto travel, and redesigning roads to make slower, safer travel a priority over faster, riskier transportation.

If you replaced every 55-pound car seat in Sweden with, say, Clek Fllos, they’d still have the lowest child death rates on the planet. Our seats are good enough. We just aren’t using them–and our driving culture and infrastructure aren’t helping.

Until we adopt societal-level changes, the secrets to keeping your family safe will continue to be found in choosing safe speeds, following best practices with car seats,  and choosing safe roads.  Don’t wait for the government or your neighbors to follow best practices, or you’ll be waiting an awfully long time.

If you find my information on best practices in car and car seat safety helpful, you can buy my books here or do your shopping through this Amazon link. Canadians can shop here for Canadian purchases. Have a question or want to discuss best practices? Send me an email at carcrashdetective [at] gmail [dot] com.

Are Car Seats Required in Cabs (Taxis, Uber, Lyft) to Travel with Kids?

Are Car Seats Required in Cabs (Taxis, Uber, Lyft) to Travel with Kids?
It doesn’t matter whether it’s a standard taxi or a 21st-century equivalent; if it’s not a bus, train, or plane, it needs a car seat.

When it comes to car seats and keeping kids safe in cars, there are a lot of myths that circle around the Internet and water coolers. Many parents think rear-facing is only necessary until 1 (it’s safest to rear-face until at least 4 or 5). Others think seat belts and car seats aren’t necessary for short trips (kids can get seriously injured or killed in 20 mph crashes). Still others feel it’s fine for kids 4, 5, or 6 and up to sit in the front seat (kids are safest in the back seat until at least 13).

Fortunately, the more we know, the better decisions we can make. Today we’re going to look at another common set of myths: that you don’t actually need car seats in cabs, whether in taxis or in ride-sharing programs like Lyft or Uber. The truth is that car seats *and seat belts* are just as necessary in taxis as they are in any other car, minivan, SUV, or pickup truck, and we’re going to go into why to use them and which ones work best at which ages and stages.

Are car seats and seat belts required in taxis, cabs, and ride-shares like Uber, Lyft, and carpooling?

A KeyFit 30 is affordable and takes seconds to install in a taxi, but it can mean the difference between a lifetime and a lifetime of grief.
A KeyFit 30 is affordable and takes seconds to install in a taxi, but it can mean the difference between a lifetime and a lifetime of grief.

Yes! Many people think there’s some kind of grace law or immunity when using hired cars, but the law doesn’t stop applying just because you’re paying someone to drive you around in a yellow (or any other colored) car. People can and do get pulled over for not using car seats or seat belts in taxis and Ubers. It doesn’t happen often, especially in big cities where the police are busier, but it does happen, and it is against the law in many locations, though not in all of them. For example, New York City doesn’t require car seats in yellow cabs (regulated taxis). Technically, they don’t even require seat belt use for passengers under 16. This is insane, because physics doesn’t take a break in a taxicab, but it’s one of many examples of how you need to go beyond the law to protect yourself, because laws in the US (and a number of other countries) aren’t written to benefit citizens, but corporations.

Basically, if you’re in a situation where you’d be expected to use a car seat or seat belt in your own car, you’ll be expected to use one, legally-speaking, in a cab. The driver isn’t going to call the police on you, but there are drivers who will refuse to drive unless you’re buckled up. Depending on their companies and insurance, they might be liable if something happens to you or your kids if you weren’t safely restrained. Alternatively, and more critically, they might not want to be killed by human cannonballs in their back and passenger seats. We’ll go into that next.

What are the risks of not using car seats and seat belts in taxis? Is it really dangerous?

An Extend2Fit will let you rear-face most kids until 5 and forward-face most kids until at least 6 while costing well under $200.
An Extend2Fit will let you rear-face most kids until 5 and forward-face most kids until at least 6 while costing well under $200.

Yes! The risks are identical to those you’d face driving anywhere on your own without placing your children (or yourself) in appropriate restraints. The risk of serious injury (e.g., broken bones, brain damage, death) is 7-8x higher for children who aren’t properly restrained than the risk for children who are.

The dangers aren’t just extended to children. Occupants in the front seats of cars who use lap and shoulder seat belts are 45% (roughly half) as likely to die in an otherwise fatal crash as occupants who don’t. If you’re buckled up in the front seat of a pickup truck, SUV, or van, your odds of death drop by 60%. If you’re in the back seats, buckling up in a car with lap and shoulder belts cuts your risk of death by 58%–this reduction jumps to 75% in vans, pickup trucks, and minivans.

These are huge odds to gamble. I’ve written about people who have made these gambles with tragic results. Taxi deaths happen in big cities–New York, Chicago, Los Angeles–but they also happen in suburbs and small towns every single day of the year. A lifetime of love and potential can never be recovered.

Additionally, the IIHS notes that unbelted occupants (e.g., any teen or adult out of a seat belt or any child out of a car seat) pose severe risks for every occupant in a vehicle, even safely restrained ones. If you’re in a frontal crash (e.g., a head-on collision or a crash into a tree or telephone pole), a belted driver is 137% more likely to die if the passenger behind him or her is unbelted. And in any kind of crash, the risk of every occupant in the vehicle dying increases by 40% with just one unbelted occupant. To put it simply, if anyone isn’t restrained properly, everyone is more likely to die, even if everyone else is safely restrained. And the unrestrained person or child has much, much higher odds of death.

What about on short trips in the city / town / suburbs or at low speeds? Do I still need car seats and seat belts then?

A RodiFix will let you booster your kids from 5 until 12, safely restraining them from kindergarten until adolescence, when they'll no longer need car seats.
A RodiFix will let you booster your kids from 5 until 12, safely restraining them from kindergarten until adolescence, when they’ll no longer need car seats.

Yes! I cover this in detail in this article on using restraints on short trips. Even if you’re in your neighborhood or subdivision, if your children aren’t restrained or if you aren’t restrained, the same risks apply. It doesn’t take much speed at all to cause serious harm in a vehicle. While a 10 mph crash is the equivalent of being pushed off a 3.3 foot tall desk, a 15 mph crash jumps to the equivalent of being pushed off a 7.5 foot ladder. A 20 mph crash raises the stakes even more quickly to the equivalent of being pushed off the roof of a one story house–a 13.4 foot fall. A 25 mph crash is like being pushed off the roof of a 2 story building–a 20.5 foot fall. And finally, a 30 mph crash is the equivalent of being pushed off the roof of a 3 story building–a 30 foot fall.

When you keep in mind the fact that most cities, suburbs, and towns have at least 25-30 mph speed limits in residential areas and that most people universally exceed speed limits, it’s hopefully clear that it takes very little speed to result in a severe to fatal injury to anyone unrestrained. Or to put it mildly, if you wouldn’t push your child off the roof of a house, why would you allow a taxi driver to by bypassing a car seat or attempting to hold a child in your lap?

What kinds of car seats should I use for my baby / child when taking a taxi?

Now that we know what the law states and, far more importantly, what the laws of physics will do to your loved ones, it’s hopefully clear that it’s necessary for all adults and adolescents to be restrained with seat belts and for all children under 12 to be restrained in appropriate car seats. The final question to address involves what constitutes appropriate car seats. Fortunately, this question is quite easy to answer, and the answers are quite affordable.

Start with rear-facing; it’s most important. Rear-face until kids are at least 4-5, although the longer the better. The Graco Extend2Fit and Clek Fllo are two of many seats that will allow you to rear-face until 50 pounds. From then on, you can either forward-face or move directly to a high-back booster like the Clek Oobr, Peg Perego Viaggio Flex 120, or Maxi-Cosi RodiFix; you can use these from when your child is 5 to when s/he is physically capable of passing the 5-step test for seat belt use, which most kids will pass by the ages of 10 to 12. From then on, your children will use seat belts in taxis every time–just like you will.

Keeping kids safe in taxis doesn’t have to be difficult; it simply requires the commitment to safely restrain them (and their parents) every time. Don’t place the next 70 to 80 years of your kids’ lives in the balance of 7-8 potentially fatal minutes unrestrained in a taxi.

If you find my information on best practices in car and car seat safety helpful, you can buy my books here or do your shopping through this Amazon link. Canadians can shop here for Canadian purchases.  It costs nothing extra to do so, but when you shop through my links, a small portion of your purchase, regardless of what you buy, will go toward the maintenance of The Car Crash Detective.