In some cars, rears seats fold at 60/40 (2 seats on kerb side fold together and one seat on off side fold alone).
In some other cars we have the reverse system (40/60 - 2 seats on off side fold together).
Which arrangement do you find better?
|
|
I can think of a situation where it would make a difference, but that wouldn't sway me in any way.
|
|
|
Blimey, sounds like you've got too much time on your hands.
;-)
|
|
As I have one child I prefer the single seat to be kerbside for safety if the other two need to be folded. However, if I had two children I would prefer the single seat on the offside for the same reason. Unless of course the reason for folding the seats was to accomodate more luggage for a foreign trip in which case the reverse preference would be true in both cases. In other words, I don't care any more. My brain hurts. I would buy a roofrack.
|
Two on the kerbside is better as you can push the passenger seat far forward to accommodate wide and long packages, or even recline it completely. Doing this with the driver's seat and still driving is difficult!
But as shoespy states single on kerbside is better with a child as when you need to drop the seat you get the double width everytime without having to move the car seat.
|
|
|
|
In some cars rears seats fold at 60/40 (2 seats on kerb side fold together and one seat on off side fold alone). In some other cars we have the reverse system (40/60 - 2 seats on off side fold together).
I wish you hadn't pointed that out. Next time I change cars it will yet another factor I'll have to consider. Up to now ignorance was bliss!
|
I think 60/40 is probably better. Most of the time I had to fold seat (for luggage), it was the single rear seat and two passengers occupying other two seats. So, naturally I prefer they seat on kerb side rather than at off side.
IIRC, the cars are designed with 60/40 favouring kerb side. But during LHD-RHD conversion, they don't bother mirroring the layout.
|
What about 33/33/33 ?
IIRC it was the Austin Metro that started off the asymmetric split folding rear seats fashion, which most other manufacturers quickly followed. There were a lot of 50/50s around in the 80s, too (I remember a friend's Fiat 127) although the Polski-Fiat Polonez carried off the wooden spoon for 0/0 (the only hatchback with a totally non-folding rear seat!)
"Two passengers nearside" is the pattern for most continental built cars, certainly my current Ford and previous three Opels. Do more families have two children than one? Are there more with three than two? Are two ISOFIX mountings on outside seats less safe than one centrally mounted one?
We're dangerously near a previously charted territory of LHD-RHD changeover grievances (indicators, wipers, bonnet release, fusebox, blah blah...) so I'm going to get my anorak on and nip out to the shops for a copy of Parker's guide right now.
:-)
|
|
In the early 80s Subaru saloons came with a seperate "floating" centre section, perhaps best described as a 40/20/40 system - the best of all worlds. Or was there a bit of backrest left between the seat and door ? so that would really be a 5/35/20/35/5 then.
|
|
|
What about 33/33/33 ?
Where's the remaining 1?
|
Eaten by the gaps between seats ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
