Maybe headrest position is not a 'one size fits all' or good for everyone, but I have noticed this.... For me, the 2010 headrest position is really good. Recaro says a headrest ought to be quite close to the head when properly adjusted (IIRC less than 2 cm). I needed to add about 7/8" of foam into the headrest cover on my 09 - the headrest was too far back no matter how I adjusted the seat or headrest. I've noticed many older cars headrest's are too far back to do much good in a bad rear end collision. The 2010 Prius has 'active headrests' and I believe many other new model Toyotas have them too. I've noticed Camry's and Corolla headrests seem quite close, but they are more correct IMO. In a bad rear end collision, you want the headrest to be close to catch your head from snapping backward on impact. That happened to me in a Ford Escort in 1991, and my mid-back is not quite the same.
I'm gettin' off topic, but how could you have a sliding forward feeling in seat and need to elevate front in a 2010 Prius? It has a height adjuster that tilts the back of seat bottom down quite a bit. This was an issue in the 01 - 09 that has been fixed in the 2010. I cannot stress enough how much better the 2010 Prius seat is than the 01 - 09. I drove my 09 with stock seat yesterday morning, and no joke, for me the seat is seriously awful. IMO, 2010 Prius driver's seat is right up there with a Camry, Venza, etc... 2010 steering wheel could use a little more telescope to the driver though.
Thanks for the insight. Are you saying the seat height adjustor only adjusts the back of the seat? Therefore, by adjusting the seat height, the angle of the seat is adjusted? Of course, the manual is not clear on this and I only had the car for a week and have not had time to play with all the adjustments yet.
Pumping height adjuster down moves the seat bottom (and seatback too, they're attached) down and back in an arc and changes its angle, or conversely, up and forward. Tall people usually need their behinds near the floorboard in a small car and a seat bottom tilted back to support longer thighs.
The key phrase here is "when properly adjusted". The Prius headrest cannot be adjusted, properly or otherwise. I would love to be able to adjust the headrest so it was 2 cm behind my head, but instead it not only touches my head, it pushes it forward. That's neither acceptable nor safe. So I'm still driving my old car. I keep hoping someone will come up with a solution but I'll probably be forced to buy something other than a Prius. Linda
I have no problem with the head rest, I have a hard time trying to have my head even touch the head rest
Have you been to the dealer (?) because the manual shows that the headrest can be triggered forward by certain pressures on the seatback, and it could be you just need to return it to the original position. I am another of those who have no interference from the head restraint even though I keep the seat quite upright. Take a look at the manual and the description of the active head restraint. Also, maybe look at another new Prius on the lot and see if yours is the same as those.
I have been through this with the dealership. They told me it's a feature, not a bug, and assured me that my inability to adjust it to fit my body was for my own good. I have difficulty believing they've engineered the interior to fit a narrow range of body types, but these seats are really unusual. It is true that I won't get whiplash behind the wheel of a Prius. Because I'll be driving something else. I know many people have this complaint so I keep returning to this forum occasionally in the hope that someone has posted a solution. I haven't bought the car of my dreams and probably won't be able to, but I'll keep checking until I have to replace my aging car.
I just put my headrest in the vice and bent it backwards until it is comfortable, do at a spot above where it goes into the seat carrier. Rarely does it get adjusted up or down anyway.
It's a good point. Certainly it's not one size fit all. I wish Toyota made it adjustable. But perhaps the lawyers made that impossible because if they allow drivers to adjust, then surely some people will adjust it too far back so that it does not provide proper protection. To be on the safer side, they made it a little bid too much forward. The shape of human bodies does vary. Some people's spines are unnaturally curved forward (due to either genetics or bad posture over long period of time), such that the headrest feels OK for tham. But for others, who have straight back and correct posture, the headrests are forcing them to bent. It's very unfortunate that the healthier people are punished most. I will bet that no single professional ballet dancer will find these headrest comfortable because they all have perfect posture.
I, too was having a problem with the headrest being too far forward. The solution for me was to rotate them 180 degrees. I'm not sure if it affects safety, but I do know leaving them the way they were was not acceptable. I don't want a headrest dictating how I position myself.
Since 1969 the DOT (FMVSS202) has required vehicles sold in NA to include head restraints (commonly mis-described as "headrests") to reduce the incidence of whiplash injuries in rear impact crashes. Most American and Japanese cars equipped their cars with head restraints that performed poorly because they could be adjusted too low to be effective; were too far away from occupant's heads, and were too soft for their intended function. Volvo led the industry in the design and construction of head restraints that actually functioned as such in the early 70's. Many have complained for years that Volvo head restraints blocked vision, were too close to occupants heads, and were too hard for occupant comfort. Volvo head restraints were not adjustable (still aren't) because Volvo placed them where they needed to be to function as a safety device and the lack of adjustment prevented occupants the opportunity to defeat the function of the safety device. Folks that turn their head restraints 180 degrees prove the wisdom of Volvo's integrated fixed restraints. European cars typically offered better protection because European Safety Standards (ECE) covering improved head restraint performance were instituted in 1999. In 2009, DOT instituted a revised head restraint standard (FMVSS202a) to address the shortcomings of the previous standard that effectively made head restraints in all cars follow many of the same practices that Volvo has long employed. (Basically harmonized DOT with ECE regs) Safety standards in the U.S. are performance standards, meaning the standard dictates how the safety system should PERFORM, they don't specify or endorse a specific design execution (i.e.: an active or passive restraint). It's up to the car maker to design execute and validate the performance of the safety system. The standard specifies limits for head impact forces and neck/torso angle. The form factor of seats and head restraints needed to be modified in many cars: seat backs grew taller: head restraints grew wider and taller which limited the MINIMUM height of head restraints to prevent occupants from lowering head restraints to a minimal profile where the head restraint can function as a fulcrum to amplify cervical extension. Head restraints were moved closer to occupants heads to limit head acceleration, impact force and neck rotation. Head restraints got harder (less front-side soft padding to limit head acceleration). (If you want more soft padding, the head restraint need to get even closer to your head!) Consumer complaints of head restraints being too close to occupants heads have skyrocketed across the board since 2009 for most automakers. Dynamic head restraints permit automakers to optimize back-set of the head restraint because the head restraint moves dynamically closer to occupants heads in active impact situations. Dynamic head restraints add cost, so more and more they are going away (and the head restraints get closer).