Can you explain to me why RFing is safer...

[sisu]

specifically, in side-impact collisions?

I accept that it is, but would like some insight into the physics involved. Thanks!!

[Joyful Tie Dyes]

http://www.car-safety.org/rearface.html

[jess71903]

Good link, but I'll try to make it a little more concise.

Most side impacts also have a frontal aspect due to braking, so the child is pushed into the seat first, then the impact happens while the child is pushed into the seat shell. For the same crash forward facing, the initial braking would push the child OUT of the seat shell just before impact.

Also, a rear-facing seat is less coupled with the vehicle at the back, so the seat can pivot on impact, allowing the child's back to be more toward the point of impact, and again, pushing child into the seat shell instead of away from it.

[sisu]

Thank you both, I couldn't quite picture what advantage a RFing seat would offer over FFing, it makes more sense now.

Forward motion must play a part as well, right? Say, if you're driving down the highway at 65 mph and are hit from the side, the child would continue traveling forward (at least to some degree) while the vehicle slows pretty dramatically - so a RFing seat would offer far more head/neck support than a FFing seat. And, I guess like you said, Jess, a RF seat would be more able to pivot than a FFing seat, as well. Hmm.

[jess71903]

Yep, that's it.