In Illinois kids 4 to 7 legally have to be in booster seats now, else the driver can get a ticket. The idea is that seat belts are too high on the children without the booster seat.

I have a 1993 940T, with a third row of seats (the two rear-facing ones).

Are these seats (the rear facing ones) legally considered booster seats? I know that they are rated for something like 50 to 90 pounds and the seatbelts hit him across the chest, the same as if he were in a booster seat in the front-facing seats.

I have the owner's manual, but it doesn't mention the third row of seats (I guess because they were an option).

I doubt that they would legally be considered booster seats. Further, the 3rd seat is in what we term the "crumple zone" of your car. It is designed to "crumple". Only put your children back there if it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY because of car-pooling soccer parent woes. This was Volvo's attempt at keeping up with the American family. So if you must use it, put your faith wherever you need to, put the child that just made you angry back there, and hope.

I'm still convinced that:

1. The seats are an "appropriate child restraint system" (thus meets the criteria under Illinois law, this was the original point of the thread); and

2. The risk to a child sitting in the rear seat is minimal. For the child to be injured you would have to be rear-ended (you are much more likely to be in a head-on collision or side collision), and the person hitting you would have to hit you at a significant rate of speed.

Keep in mind that I grew up in an era when I could literally lay in the back panel in front of the rear windows, (or more commonly laying down across the back seats), or be standing in the back of a pickup (holding onto the cab) while it was moving. Having a child restrained in the back child seat of a Volvo is a safe place to be. Would the child be even safer sitting in the middle of the back seat? Probably. Would the child be even safer if he were wearing a football helmet while sitting in the middle of the back seat? Sure.

How many of you require your children to wear football helmets while riding the car? My point is that there are levels of safety, I still feel that the back seat is a reasonable place to be.

And of course, the third row seats would be safer for a child than the front passenger seat, if there is a passenger side airbag (my '93 945T doesn't have a passenger side airbag).

I'm sorry if I offended you in any way. I own a Volvo repair shop; I have been witness to numerous, in fact countless, accidents through the 18 years that we have been in business. Several of them rear end collisions, I know of 5 accidents that happened locally, at moderate not excessive speeds, 3 highway accidents that were, of course, at higher speeds, all in Volvo wagons, that had the children been in the back they would have been either seriously injured or no longer with us. As a Mom of two now teenage children, I was voicing what I see as a legitimate concern that I can substantiate with pictures. Again, my apologies.

No, don't apologize, in no way did you offend me, I was just trying to point out that the seats aren't suicide seats. They are safe seats. That is, unless you are rear-ended by a vehicle going a substancial speed higher than you, but how unlikely is that event?

All of life is full of risks, just varying degrees. There was a woman killed in Chicago a few years ago by a piece of glass falling off of a building (cut off a portion of her head, she was walking with her young child who was fine). Do I worry about walking in Chicago or around other tall buildings? No, though there is the risk.

In any event, if I remember the stat right, 1/3 of Volvo wagons sold in the US have the third row of seats, so there are a substancial number of them out there. If you think that the seats are too dangerous to put children in, I certainly respect your decision to not put your children in them (though they are teenagers now and are surely beyond the size / weight restrictions). I don't agree with it and still put my kids in them on occasion, but I respect your decision to not use them.

The point of this thread wasn't to debate the safety of the seats, it was to debate the legality of the seats to carry children. I believe that it is legal to carry children there, at least under Illinois law, assuming the child is 4 years old or older (if they are 3 or under they are supposed to be in a car seat).

Couple of thoughts on this; most community police departments run child seat clinics a couple of times a year - designed to inspect the installation of car seats and instruct folks on the proper methods and use. Amazingly over 80% of standard children's car seats are installed improperly from what I understand. So, it seems to me that if you went to one of these the officers staffing it would be trained to know what to look for and would give you a pretty reliable answer as to whether the 3rd seat meets the local regulations.

Second comment is that several years ago, I stumbled across a letter on the internet from Volvo to a consumer with a response to the question of the safety of the 3rd seat. It was well reasoned and detailed as you'd expect from Volvo. Forunately I was able to find it in the archives and here's the link:

http://brickboard.com/ARCHIVES/1999MAR/10009554.shtml

Paul

If I were to argue this case in court, I would suggest that the rear third seat is merely a factory installed booster seat – similar to the integrated booster seat in the middle position of the back seat. After all, the purpose of a booster seat is to position the occupant in such a way that the seat belt restrains them properly. That’s exactly what the rear-facing 3rd seat does.

I’d also add that in the event of a head-on collision, facing backwards is the best possible position to be in – so the rear-facing 3rd seat is the safest seat in the vehicle. Obviously, a rear-end collision is a completely different story. Which brings up a topic that’s been discussed in other threads. It seems to be a logical conclusion that 3rd seat safety is adequate for “around town” driving (up to, say about 45 mph). But at highway speeds, one might be better served to NOT allow the kids to ride in it. One Brickboarder observed that the rear of his car was crumpled (read: crushed) during a rear-end collision at highway speeds. That “crumpling” is what the car is designed to do – it absorbs the energy and saves your life. But if kids are sitting in the “crumple zone” well, the result would likely be catastrophic.

Jeff Pierce
--
'93 945 Turbo ( one kickass family car ! ), '92 Mercedes 190E (my daily driver), '53 Willys-Overland Pickup (my snow-plow truck/conversation piece)

Dear Jeff,

Good p.m. and may this find you well. I believe that in a prior post, it was pointed out that:
(a) Volvo's safety cage encompasses the third seat area
(b) Volvo is unaware of any third-seat occupants being killed in a collision over the past 20+ years.

You might want to contact VolvoUSA and ask them if they have data on this. I recommend you speak with Ms. Jenny Kaiser, a Customer Service Rep, whom I have found to be smart and straightforward.

Yours faithfully,

spook

I'm with Gregg Shadduck. I'm not going to bet my child's life on a Volvo customer service rep's theory that the rear zone can withstand a 60 mph collision. I ain't no engineer, but I know that when my kids are sitting in that rear-facing 3rd seat, there's a little over one foot (30 cm) between their knees and the hatch. I don't care how well the car is designed, that distance -- or lack thereof -- stacks the odds horribly against the occupant.

When I hit the highway, passengers will be in the rear seat, the "way back" will hold my luggage/gear.

Just my 2 cents (Arguably worth that!)

Respectfully,

Jeff Pierce
--
'93 945 Turbo ( one kickass family car ! ), '92 Mercedes 190E (my daily driver), '53 Willys-Overland Pickup (my snow-plow truck/conversation piece)

Dear Jeff and Gregg,

Good p.m. Forgive me: I wrote in haste this a.m. I did not mean to suggest for even a micro-second that you should take the word of a Volvo Customer Service Rep for this, or anything else.

What I meant to suggest is that you should ask if Volvo has an official position on the use of the third seat, backed up by engineering work and/or statistical studies. I would conclude, from the fact that they made these seats for decades, that they have such data. Moreover, if these seats were not safe, they'd have been sued. Can anyone recall hearing about that?

The distance from the back of the car to the third seat's leading edge is not what is relevant. After all, the driver's left side (in the US) may be only 6" from the door's inner surface, and perhaps 10" from the door's outer surface. Yet, a Volvo door offer pretty substantial protection against impact energy.

Before concluding that it is not safe to have kids use the third seat, I think it would be well to get from Volvo whatever data they have/are willing to share on the matter.

Ms. Kaiser won't have the data. But I'd bet she'd be willing to find out, who does have it.

Once upon a time, I asked her to inquire of the folks at Volvo Engineering in Goteborg (Sweden) if it would be safe to install a 740 roof rack on a 940 car. It took a few weeks, but her reply - in an e-mail - was that it was perfectly safe to do so. I asked this question, to be sure that the roof structures were the same. Once I knew that they were, I went ahead with the installation. It has been fine.

In short, Volvo (the Engineering dept. in Goteborg/Gothenburg) has lots of data about its cars. Seek, and you may find.

Yours faithfully,

spook

Well, spook, it is clear that we see the world differently.

I, for my part, am 53 years old.
Had knee surgery the old-fashioned way 25 years ago. A bitch.
Raised 2 healthy kids. Knock on wood.
Have taken prescription narcotics twice in the past 3 years for pain.
Limped through disabling sciatica.
Got 2nd and 3rd degree burns (the deep ones) on my feet to end last summer.

Had 2 cars (1 Volvo) totaled out from under me by being rear-ended by space cadets.
Wife wiped out 2 by other means.

That colors my perception, you betcha!

If anyone wishes to join angels dancing on the head of a pin because Volvo folks say it's cool (and I like angels and Tomten as much as the next guy), great!

But from my end of the telescope, and not meaning to flog this horse (and will now stop doing so) it's not worth the risk. (e.g. kids in wagon's third seat at highway speeds)

And I recognize that I would have felt differently half a lifetime ago.
Fascinating process.

Parents pick your end of the telescope. I like YOU making YOUR choices. :-)

Spook, my daughter was sitting NEXT to me in the front when we were rear-ended last summer in our 745.

My opinion, as parent and survivor: for a kid, life is too short to watch through the rear window as some moron comes at you in his jacked up SUV or whatever. To hell with the magic crumple zone. My cousin drives one of those 3-ton behemouths that has been jacked up 4-6 inches, and places the bumper in exactly the right position to pierce a door or window and do some real harm. I flinch every time I see it in her driveway. :-(

OK, did a little more research.

Per Volvo, the seats are designed to hold children between 50 & 88 pounds, and under 59" (under 4' 11"). The seats are designed for children, of course.

The Illinois law states that children between 4 & 7 must be in an appropriate child restraint system. Specifically, and talking about the driver, "...such person shall be responsible for providing for the protection of such child by properly securing him or her in an appropriate child restraint system...."

and:

"For purposes of this Section and Section 4b, "child restraint system" means any device which meets the standards of the United States Department of Transportation designed to restrain, seat or position children, which also includes a booster seat."

I tried to find out what the US Dept. of Transportation specs were, but all I could see was guidance saying that the belt needed to go across the chest, not the throat or neck, and when my son is in the third row of seats, which were designed for children, the belt does hit him in the chest, the same as if he were in the front "adult" seats in a booster seat.

I am fairly confident that they meet the definition of "appropriate child restraint system", but if anybody has any input I'd be happy to hear.

Thanks!

A dealer in your state should know. It would be best to get it in writing from some recognized authority so the COP that still stops you can be "set right".
--
'96 965 with 16' wheels at 113K. Had '85 745 Turbo Diesel for 200K.

>so the COP that still stops you can be "set right"

Oh, they LOVE that! My experience is it's best to just say "yes sir/yes mam" and fight it in court. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, or some such...
--
Lance '92 965 w/ 190K miles

Yep, that's also been my experience for the most part. Once in a while you find a reasonable one though. Happened more often with the Volvo and no hair that it did with the Porsche when I had hair!
--
'96 965 with 16' wheels at 113K. Had '85 745 Turbo Diesel for 200K.

and documentary evidence obtained PRIOR to the event saves lots of lawyers bills...

Totally agree. My comment simply was that arguing with the cop almost always just makes matters worse. Instead, show a judge your piece of paper and he is much more likely to respect it.
--
Lance '92 965 w/ 190K miles

agreed..NEVER argue with the cop...well not unless you have parked the wheel of your brick on his foot first AND his gun is in his car...

but in all seriousness, I figure if you have it in writting and explain (not argue) few cops will push it cos they (a) wont be too sure themselves and (b) will know it will get tossed out in court...and they dont want to waste their time either...

call in at your local cop shop and ask them...if they say yes - well cool, if they say 'no' then go ask a dealer...if they say 'dont know' they can hardly do you for using them.....