My thoughts on the ride quality of Mk3 coaches

[DarloRich]

Matter of opinion on both of those. I like the seats, and the subdued, warm lighting and colour scheme is to me, together with the near-identical Pendolino, one of the nicest on the network.

They seemed designed specifically to cut the circulation to my feet after about 60 minutes - awful things!

 

[lxfe_mxtterz]

I've never experienced the misfortune of having a drink get spilled onboard a HST. However on one particular journey onboard a VTEC HST from Edinburgh down to London Kings Cross, I had my phone out and placed on one of the seatback tables and at one point (somewhere between Dunbar and Newcastle) my phone got violently catapulted off the table and onto the floor. Luckily the phone was unscathed but it wasn't the best experience to have.

Compared to my previous Class 91 experiences on the ECML, I find the HSTs tend to jolt and sway quite a bit more than the Class 91s, although that's just from my own personal experience. I do prefer the interior of the VTEC (now LNER) HSTs over the Class 91s however, as they seem to be more spacious and airy, although that's just my opinion.

 

[_toommm_]

I've never experienced the misfortune of having a drink get spilled onboard a HST. However on one particular journey onboard a VTEC HST from Edinburgh down to London Kings Cross, I had my phone out and placed on one of the seatback tables and at one point (somewhere between Dunbar and Newcastle) my phone got violently catapulted off the table and onto the floor. Luckily the phone was unscathed but it wasn't the best experience to have.

Compared to my previous Class 91 experiences on the ECML, I find the HSTs tend to jolt and sway quite a bit more than the Class 91s, although that's just from my own personal experience. I do prefer the interior of the VTEC (now LNER) HSTs over the Class 91s however, as they seem to be more spacious and airy, although that's just my opinion.

The MK4s were originally designed to tilt, hence the same tapered design and same cramped feeling as the 220s/221s

 

[cactustwirly]

Matter of opinion on both of those. I like the seats, and the subdued, warm lighting and colour scheme is to me, together with the near-identical Pendolino, one of the nicest on the network.

Awful seats, awful interior, awful trains.
Hate the cramped and claustrophobia of the 22xs (222s are slightly better), there isn't enough space for any luggage, and the seats belong in a commuter train!
I don't think bombardier could design a worse train if they tried!
Then you have a HST which is by far the best designed train on the network, only let down by it's age.

 

[_toommm_]

On the subject of MK3s, currently on ATW Premier Service from Cardiff. Bouncy, definitely. Beer slid across the table again. But regardless, what an experience!

 

[dk1]

I have always thought the ride on a mark 3 pretty awful at speed. Often better nearer the middle of the vehicle but if you are standing in the vestibule then good luck. Perhaps surprisingly I find the smoothest ride is often on a 158.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

All this thread demonstrates (yet again!) is that ride quality is largely subjective. Of course drinks shouldn't be "catapulted" around but maintaining ride quality on vehicles as large as railway carriages is not as easy as some might think. It's possible, for example, for small amounts of wear to make a big difference in particular situations. And of course even something as mundane as suspension technology continues to evolve.

The Mk3 design is over 45 years old now (prototype HST built 1972) so the fact that it is still deemed as appropriate for long-distance inter-city services is a great credit to the designers. Indeed when new it was seen as world leading when it came to ride quality and only the French Corail, a contemporary of the Mk3, came anywhere near it. But time moves on and there are better riding vehicles around now even if some are let down by their interiors. I doubt however if members of the public are anything like as concerned by such matters as us here.

Another point worth making is that the GWR route benefits from the legacy of the original broad gauge construction. When the gauge was converted the same track bed was of course still available meaning not only that tracks are further apart, reducing the effect of aerodynamic "collisions", but the track bed itself is just a little more stable. Not for nothing did commentators refer to "Brunel's billiard table". Little wonder then that HSTs seem to ride better on the GWML than elsewhere.

 

[trebor79]

The only time I've ever seen a drink spilled on a train was in 1985 or thereabouts. Travelling Glasgow to Euston on the WCML, so it would have been mk2 or perhaps even mk1 stock (too young to know, I was just excited to be going such a long way on the train).
At some point, travelling quite fast, a high frequency up and down back to front vibration developed which sloshed my fathers coffee out of the cup.

 

[yorksrob]

I think seat back tables tend to be quite unstable whatever train you're on.

 

[yorksrob]

But time moves on and there are better riding vehicles around now even if some are let down by their interiors. I doubt however if members of the public are anything like as concerned by such matters as us here.

Is it a bit of bumpiness here and there, that you doubt the public are so worried about, or the comfort of the seat and spaciousness of the interior they have to travel in ?

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Is it a bit of bumpiness here and there, that you doubt the public are so worried about, or the comfort of the seat and spaciousness of the interior they have to travel in ?

The ride quality of almost any railway vehicle running on properly maintained continuously welded rails will be superior to almost any motor vehicle running on anything other than a brand new road that hasn't yet been dug up. Since that is rail's main competition I would suggest few members of the public have any concerns about Mk3 ride quality. As to train interiors I happen to very much dislike the interior of the superb-riding Pendolino but I'm also aware that among the wider travelling public I am in a tiny minority. I would suggest that most people's concerns are with the availability of a seat at all, at an affordable price and that trains run punctually. The only significant issue for some people is with the lack of leg room in many seats though suburban stock is much worse for this. And this problem also exists in the back seats of many cars too. I happen to like being able to look out of train windows, a preference shared with quite a few on here, but again the wider public is most evidently largely unconcerned with this aspect of train interior design.

 

[corsaVXR]

The ride quality of almost any railway vehicle running on properly maintained continuously welded rails will be superior to almost any motor vehicle running on anything other than a brand new road that hasn't yet been dug up..

There's a few physical factors that come into play that are in favour of cars, however, I would argue that perception of ride quality in a car is better than a train, as your environmental awareness is greater (i.e. you can see the road ahead).

I do agree with you about the pendolinos though - interior is outdated and can't hold a candle to an ICE3-T.

However, regarding the mk3s - they just need to go in the bin. Don't care about the ride quality, they're just outdated in every respect.

 

[Spamcan81]

Travelled on the 18:15 LDS - KGX on Monday. It was an HST and the ride was absolutely fine with no spillages. The outward journey behind the Class 90 was not as smooth but still no spillages.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

There's a few physical factors that come into play that are in favour of cars, however, I would argue that perception of ride quality in a car is better than a train, as your environmental awareness is greater (i.e. you can see the road ahead).

I do agree with you about the pendolinos though - interior is outdated and can't hold a candle to an ICE3-T.

However, regarding the mk3s - they just need to go in the bin. Don't care about the ride quality, they're just outdated in every respect.

I think another factor is the compulsory wearing of seatbelts reduces the likelihood of car passengers being "displaced" by instances of poor ride quality. This enhances the feeling of security and comfort for some people even if road safety statistics say otherwise.

 

[yorksrob]

The ride quality of almost any railway vehicle running on properly maintained continuously welded rails will be superior to almost any motor vehicle running on anything other than a brand new road that hasn't yet been dug up. Since that is rail's main competition I would suggest few members of the public have any concerns about Mk3 ride quality. As to train interiors I happen to very much dislike the interior of the superb-riding Pendolino but I'm also aware that among the wider travelling public I am in a tiny minority. I would suggest that most people's concerns are with the availability of a seat at all, at an affordable price and that trains run punctually. The only significant issue for some people is with the lack of leg room in many seats though suburban stock is much worse for this. And this problem also exists in the back seats of many cars too. I happen to like being able to look out of train windows, a preference shared with quite a few on here, but again the wider public is most evidently largely unconcerned with this aspect of train interior design.

I would agree with a lot of that. People want trains that they can afford to travel on and that turn up (increasingly rare these days), but once you're on your train for a couple of hours, you want it to be comfortable.

 

[Journeyman]

Matter of opinion on both of those. I like the seats, and the subdued, warm lighting and colour scheme is to me, together with the near-identical Pendolino, one of the nicest on the network.

Agree. The lighting on most trains is too bright and harsh for my liking - the design in the Voyagers and Pendolinos is pleasantly cosy and has a lovely feel to it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agree. The lighting on most trains is too bright and harsh for my liking - the design in the Voyagers and Pendolinos is pleasantly cosy and has a lovely feel to it.

Perhaps the last trains in the modern era truly designed to have a premium rather than utilitarian feel in Standard?

 

[_toommm_]

Perhaps the last trains in the modern era truly designed to have a premium rather than utilitarian feel in Standard?

Could be argued it wasn't designed this way as it is post-refurb, but:
Class 185

 

[43096]

Perhaps the last trains in the modern era truly designed to have a premium rather than utilitarian feel in Standard?

Designed? Maybe. Although the designers failed miserably.

Any designer who puts passengers next to large plastic panels and gives luggage stacks a window view has failed.

 

[Journeyman]

Could be argued it wasn't designed this way as it is post-refurb, but:
Class 185

I've not been on a refurbished one yet, but from what I've seen, they look excellent.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Could be argued it wasn't designed this way as it is post-refurb, but:
Class 185

OK, I'll give you that one. The refurb does appear to be of *very* high quality with those features, whereas the original interior was a bit more of a slightly poshed up suburban EMU (Class 350) with a small stretch and some diesel engines underneath.

 

[AverageTD]

The best ride I’ve had on an express train is a 374 but leaving Eurostar aside I think the VTWC 221s are brilliant and the 222s aren’t bad. I find mk4s to be a lot better than mk3s when it comes to comfort but both aren’t great when it comes to food and drink.

 

[_toommm_]

OK, I'll give you that one. The refurb does appear to be of *very* high quality with those features, whereas the original interior was a bit more of a slightly poshed up suburban EMU (Class 350) with a small stretch and some diesel engines underneath.

Couldn't think of a better DMU to commute a 100 mile round trip on 5 days a week!
Through the Hope Valley too!

 

[Helvellyn]

I have always thought the ride on a mark 3 pretty awful at speed. Often better nearer the middle of the vehicle but if you are standing in the vestibule then good luck. Perhaps surprisingly I find the smoothest ride is often on a 158.

I always try and get in the middle of both Mark 3 and Mark 4 coaches. Sitting directly above the bogies is very lively!

As the 158 and their smooth ride that is down to the superb BREL T4 bogie (and P4 powered version). It was also used under the Mark 3B DVTs and the 442 Wessex Electrics, which have a very smooth ride compared to a Desiro. Unfortunately the T4 wasn't selected for the Mark 4 stock, BR instead opting for Swiss SIG BT41 bogies. The initial ride was supposedly very rough on those before some modifications, as documented here.

 

[FQTV]

I always try and get in the middle of both Mark 3 and Mark 4 coaches. Sitting directly above the bogies is very lively!

As the 158 and their smooth ride that is down to the superb BREL T4 bogie (and P4 powered version). It was also used under the Mark 3B DVTs and the 442 Wessex Electrics, which have a very smooth ride compared to a Desiro. Unfortunately the T4 wasn't selected for the Mark 4 stock, BR instead opting for Swiss SIG BT41 bogies. The initial ride was supposedly very rough on those before some modifications, as documented here.

Mk4 ride quality was indeed absolutely shocking at introduction. It was almost impossible to keep anything still on a table, to the extent that, before anything could be done to the engineering, BR had to stick non-slip mats on to the table surfaces.

Mk3 ride quality, today, must surely be as much a function of age, wear and maintenance than anything else. Unless you can put a new-build Mk3 against another design, all that you can really do is compare a clapped-out, vintage relic, with a shiny, brand new vehicle which might collapse in half the time that a Mk3 has plodded on for thus far. Or not.

Personally, I think that a well-maintained Mk3 is a very nice place to be - in Standard the CrossCountry ones are particularly lovely, especially with the rich upholstery tone. 185s are similarly excellent in their new guise.

 

[cactustwirly]

Just take a ride on a 387 at 90mph!
Your drink wouldn't last 5 minutes!

 

[nlogax]

The only lesson I've learned from regular jaunts up and down the ECML is not to sit at the ends of the carriages. Mk3 or Mk4, it doesn't matter - it always feels like a pretty uncomfortable ride when you're basically sat atop the bogies.

As the 158 and their smooth ride that is down to the superb BREL T4 bogie (and P4 powered version). It was also used under the Mark 3B DVTs and the 442 Wessex Electrics, which have a very smooth ride compared to a Desiro.

Aren't the 442 trailers equipped with T3-7s which were a development of BT13s? They certainly don't look like T4s.

 

[NoOnesFool]

Agreed, the racks on the 222 are far too small, but in just about every other respect, I consider it to be a far better train than the HST - the seat design is particularly good, way better than the IC70s in the EMT HSTs.

Agreed and the ride quality is much smoother. I often wonder if it is to do with the weight of the carriage, MK3 carriages are circa 34 tons, and Meridian carriages are 46+ tons, could just be improved bogie performance though. Who knows.

 

[43096]

The only lesson I've learned from regular jaunts up and down the ECML is not to sit at the ends of the carriages. Mk3 or Mk4, it doesn't matter - it always feels like a pretty uncomfortable ride when you're basically sat atop the bogies.



Aren't the 442 trailers equipped with T3-7s which were a development of BT13s? They certainly don't look like T4s.

Correct. 442s are P3 motor and T3 trailer bogies. There’s been all sorts of stuff about T4s and SR Mk6 motor bogies over the years, but is incorrect. Not hard to tell - check a photo!

 

[43096]

I always try and get in the middle of both Mark 3 and Mark 4 coaches. Sitting directly above the bogies is very lively!

As the 158 and their smooth ride that is down to the superb BREL T4 bogie (and P4 powered version). It was also used under the Mark 3B DVTs and the 442 Wessex Electrics, which have a very smooth ride compared to a Desiro. Unfortunately the T4 wasn't selected for the Mark 4 stock, BR instead opting for Swiss SIG BT41 bogies. The initial ride was supposedly very rough on those before some modifications, as documented here.

Much easier having a smooth ride at 90mph with 140mph bogies....

The reason the SIG bogie was used under the Mark 4s was because BREL wouldn’t guarantee ride performance at 140mph - think the spec was the ride had to be as good at 140mph as a BT10 at 125mph.