Why is the rear seat split 60% on the driver's side

[GroovyGeek]

Anyone know the rationale for having the rear seat split 60% on the driver's side? Seems like a poor design choice. I plan on sleeping in the back of the Bronco in the back country. Would have loved to be able to pull the passenger seat forward, set up my bed, tied down everything else to the MOLLE racks and be done. Instead now I have to move the driver seat back and forth every evening and also shift the sleeping pad.

Sponsored

 

[toymaster]

Well, they had a 50/50 shot didn't they.

 

[Squatch]

Well, they had a 50/50 shot didn't they.

Only in the two-door.

 

[HighVelocity]

Sleep on the roof like a normal person.

 

[Silver-Bolt]

F150 is the same. As is every other brand I have owned.

 

[Grumpy]

Loading cargo purposes. Only one person has to occupy the vehicle at any given moment. So, when larger than normal cargo is needed to load, the passenger side is laid flat with the most room available.

 

[Jdyount]

Is this a real question? You want the larger side on the driver's side for getting larger cargo in without having to walk around and put both sides down.

Number of people who carry stuff in their Bronco > Number of people of sleep in their Bronco

 

[Mortonm]

Also most people with car seats for kids have them on the passenger side. This still allows you to drop the larger section if needed.

 

[GroovyGeek]

Loading cargo purposes. Only one person has to occupy the vehicle at any given moment. So, when larger than normal cargo is needed to load, the passenger side is laid flat with the most room available.

That would seem to be better achieved by having the 60% split on the passenger side? That would allow wider over sized objects while still preserving a seating option behind the driver.

Is this a real question? You want the larger side on the driver's side for getting larger cargo in without having to walk around and put both sides down.

Number of people who carry stuff in their Bronco > Number of people of sleep in their Bronco

See above. If you have oversized cargo you need to bring the passenger seat back down so you are walking around anyway.

Also most people with car seats for kids have them on the passenger side. This still allows you to drop the larger section if needed.

I understand why people would want a car seat on the passenger side - so they can easier keep an eye on the kid. But from a safety perspective that is not a great choice. In a car crash the most dangerous seat in the vehicle is the front row passenger. The second most dangerous is the second row passenger. When self preservation instincts kick in under stress the driver has a tendency to expose the passenger side of the vehicle to the impact.

In any case it seems that my brain is wired differently about this, but I am obviously missing something that is important to most people

 

[Techun]

That would seem to be better achieved by having the 60% split on the passenger side? That would allow wider over sized objects while still preserving a seating option behind the driver.



See above. If you have oversized cargo you need to bring the passenger seat back down so you are walking around anyway.



I understand why people would want a car seat on the passenger side - so they can easier keep an eye on the kid. But from a safety perspective that is not a great choice. In a car crash the most dangerous seat in the vehicle is the front row passenger. The second most dangerous is the second row passenger. When self preservation instincts kick in under stress the driver has a tendency to expose the passenger side of the vehicle to the impact.

In any case it seems that my brain is wired differently about this, but I am obviously missing something that is important to most people

Most people put the car seat behind the passenger seat because car seats are huge and result in the front row seat more forward than desired.

 

[Jdyount]

That would seem to be better achieved by having the 60% split on the passenger side? That would allow wider over sized objects while still preserving a seating option behind the driver.



See above. If you have oversized cargo you need to bring the passenger seat back down so you are walking around anyway.



I understand why people would want a car seat on the passenger side - so they can easier keep an eye on the kid. But from a safety perspective that is not a great choice. In a car crash the most dangerous seat in the vehicle is the front row passenger. The second most dangerous is the second row passenger. When self preservation instincts kick in under stress the driver has a tendency to expose the passenger side of the vehicle to the impact.

In any case it seems that my brain is wired differently about this, but I am obviously missing something that is important to most people

You want the larger side on the driver's side so that you can fit the most things WITHOUT having to walk around. How does that not make sense.

 

[Jdyount]

Most people put the car seat behind the passenger seat because car seats are huge and result in the front row seat more forward than desired.

This is wrong. You put the car seat on the driver's side so you don't have to walk around, 1000%. Nobody wants to put their kid in and have to walk back around the car in the rain or snow.

 

[toymaster]

This is wrong. You put the car seat on the driver's side so you don't have to walk around, 1000%. Nobody wants to put their kid in and have to walk back around the car in the rain or snow.

Got to disagree with you there kind internet person. When alone with a child I want to have easy reach and sight, putting them passenger side of back seat affords that for the driver. If a co-parent is on board then let them make the call of which afford easiest access during the drive.

 

[GroovyGeek]

This seems to be a raging debate on other forums too

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian-car-scene/208690-how-do-you-like-60-40-rear-seat-split.html

https://www.swedespeed.com/threads/why-rear-seat-is-40-60-rather-than-60-40-split.69163/

Seems that 40-20-40 would make everyone happy

 

[Jdyount]

Got to disagree with you there kind internet person. When alone with a child I want to have easy reach and sight, putting them passenger side of back seat affords that for the driver. If a co-parent is on board then let them make the call of which afford easiest access during the drive.

Shouldn't be reaching for your kid while driving anyway and putting the kid behind the driver affords the front passenger access to see and reach.

Sponsored