195s truly awful, not a step forward

[Bletchleyite]

It can't be as bad as an 800. I've spilt hot tea over my lap thanks to how "lively" the ride is when sitting above the bogies on those.

I find that 80x and 444s have very similar ride characteristics, indeed the whole package feels a bit like the "Class 344" I've long called for. That's one reason I like them, though I do wish they'd used different seats! (Not had chance to try Lumo yet).

I'd say 195 slightly worse but not by much.

 

[AM9]

I find that 80x and 444s have very similar ride characteristics, indeed the whole package feels a bit like the "Class 344" I've long called for. That's one reason I like them, though I do wish they'd used different seats! (Not had chance to try Lumo yet).

I'd say 195 slightly worse but not by much.

The class 397s are the 'class 344' functionally, but of course they have the same agricultural suspension setup as the 197s and 331s.

 

[ScottGallagher]

The wifi is far superior to anything on a a Pendolino, I like to avoid changing at Barrow so I don't get them too much these days , but hopefully one day they will be cleared all the way to Carlisle.

 

[Agent_Squash]

The wifi is far superior to anything on a a Pendolino, I like to avoid changing at Barrow so I don't get them too much these days , but hopefully one day they will be cleared all the way to Carlisle.

Is a 195 similar size to a 156? There’s some restrictions which mean end door stock is required currently - but the 195s will probably have to up the coast one day…

At the moment though there is little benefit to joining them up - ultimately Barrow - Airport has very different requirements to the Coast.

 

[Pinus contorta]

Is a 195 similar size to a 156? There’s some restrictions which mean end door stock is required currently - but the 195s will probably have to up the coast one day…

At the moment though there is little benefit to joining them up - ultimately Barrow - Airport has very different requirements to the Coast.

How does it work with the request stops if they send them up the coast? (I know there's only one unit at the moment that does a Millom turn back one evening a week) Does the guard have access to the buzzer at the non driving end cab,? Does the guard have to keep legging it up and down the train to the doors just to use the buzzer? Or can he she stay in the rear cab and do that?

 

[D6130]

I believe that end door units are required on the coast line to allow for emergency evacuation in the long narrow single line tunnel between Corcickle and Whitehaven. Did 142s ever work between Barrow and Whitehaven? IIRC, not.

 

[Geeves]

142s frequently did the full Preston / Barrow to Carlisle work in the past.

 

[12C]

I believe that end door units are required on the coast line to allow for emergency evacuation in the long narrow single line tunnel between Corcickle and Whitehaven. Did 142s ever work between Barrow and Whitehaven? IIRC, not.

Yes 142s regularly ran the full length of the Cumbrian Coast, just like the 108s before them, and 37s/DBSOs. There is no requirement for end doors.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The issue with some stock is I believe just that it clouts things, the clearances are quite tight. 158s aren't allowed either and they have end doors, I seem to recall the steps foul something or other.

At some point (assuming it's not closed) the work will need to be done to clear something other than 15x (well, 153, 155 and 156), as 15x aren't going to last forever. I don't know if the tight bits are already single-track, if they're double an easy fix may be like the Hastings line to single those bits and slew the track to the middle of the formation, but it's expensive and not necessary while there are 156s to work it.

 

[Pinus contorta]

It's the bridge at Aspatria and the section beyond there to Carlisle is treated as a single line section, i think I read on here once.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's the bridge at Aspatria and the section beyond there to Carlisle is treated as a single line section, i think I read on here once.

The one under the A596? If so that is double track so a fix may indeed be to single that section.

 

[Pinus contorta]

So there's the dairy and the old freight / avoiding line formation and then there's a bridge. I think it is that one.

 

[LOL The Irony]

The wifi is far superior to anything on a a Pendolino, I like to avoid changing at Barrow so I don't get them too much these days , but hopefully one day they will be cleared all the way to Carlisle.

From a WiFi standpoint, Northern put most operators to shame.

 

[AM9]

From a WiFi standpoint, Northern put most operators to shame.

Are their services so unreliable that it would be difficult travelling without wi-fi?

 

[driverd]

If they are wedded to cheap CAF units despite their serious design flaws, they should make a more serious purchase of DEMUs with a convert to EMU option or even get CAF to quote for a genuine hybrid BEMU.

Hyperbole aside, would you care to list any of these serious design flaws?

Miles off the mark, I'd say. Some niggles and annoyances, but hardly anything serious or flawed - just as you could say for literally any other unit.

That's probably the point though. They are a 2020s product which is better than 1980/90s products but inferior to a decent turn of the century product (so a probably 25 year old design). Hardly great.

Except you're viewing this from an extremely one dimensional point of view. Yes, a 170 rides better and has a comfier seat, but otherwise, they're lacking. They weigh 15 tons more than the 3 car 158 equivalent and so struggle massively for power (and to keep time). The air con isn't super reliable and the units really struggle for cooling in the summer. They don't drive particularly well and certainly aren't a forgiving unit during anything other than ideal rail head conditions. The cab is small and the desk not all that well designed. The PIS on a 170 doesn't have an inch on the functionality of that on a 195.

From a performance, operational and customer service point of view, the 195 is superior by a long mark. We are quite literally disregarding all of these excellent features of the newer unit because some people dislike a knocking bogie and a slightly firmer seat.

It’s not an agenda, I just genuinely don’t think they’re very good trains. I wouldn’t take them over any of the aforementioned stock, mainly because I don’t think they particularly ride better than any of them.

Oh come on, if you can disregard all the short comings of a 150 just for the sake of a firm ride in the 195s, I'd call that an agenda. I won't list the shortcomings of a 150 because it's been done to death - if you can't objectively see how the 195s are leagues above them, then you're not taking a balanced view here.

I’ve excluded the 331s from this criticism, despite them being just as bad, they’re extremely quick off the mark

And for a DMU, as is a 195.

I’ve tried them on several different occasions, on different types of routes, and the incessant *CLONK* sound when going over bits of track irks me to my very core. I’m not someone to usually notice bad ride quality, but it can’t be ignored. The build quality is extremely disappointing for a modern day train, it feels like they were rushed out as quickly as possible, with corners cut to save money, and marketed as “better than a pacer”, which, yeah, sure, they are, but this isn’t exactly a groundbreaking revelation

Care to list the build quality issues, ride aside?

I think you've got to look at the ride quality issues from the perspective of what was attempting to be achieved; weight reduction for reduced track wear. To say what the units have managed to pack in, in terms of facilities etc for a given mass - I'd say they've done a pretty good job. If a firm ride is the only compromise for that, it's a compromise I can certainly live with.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think you've got to look at the ride quality issues from the perspective of what was attempting to be achieved; weight reduction for reduced track wear. To say what the units have managed to pack in, in terms of facilities etc for a given mass - I'd say they've done a pretty good job. If a firm ride is the only compromise for that, it's a compromise I can certainly live with.

I don't overly mind a firm ride as per the Desiros and 80x, and I think we need to up our game on track quality in the UK to be nearer that of Germany and Switzerland - you can see what excellent track gets you by riding a 345 on the Lizzie's underground bit. But one thing about the 195s is the rattles and bangs which gives the impression of things being loose and inadequately damped, and that could do with fixing. But overall I don't think they come across as that cheap, though I'll admit the "shiny brilliant white" interior panel finish is fairly unusual for the UK (it's the norm for Spain, though), and the Northern choice of stark blues in the decor give a cheap feel as compared with TfW's use of greys and fake wood.

The main thing that looked really cheap was the cab door handle which seems to have been replaced with a T-key lock. I think the use of single glazing in the door windows was also a bad plan (and causes a lot of condensation, which will in time cause corrosion), but that's fairly minor.

Window alignment is just lazy, but that's fixable with a spanner and half an hour if they actually thought about it. The windows are bay-sized (as shown by the end sections which are aligned) so it just needs shifting round a bit with brain engaged.

 

[skyhigh]

Window alignment is just lazy, but that's fixable with a spanner and half an hour if they actually thought about it.

Except, of course, for the reservation displays. And the wiring for the plug sockets.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Except, of course, for the reservation displays.

True, though as Northern don't use these and have no plans to do so, you could just put a cover over them and pretend they were never there.

And the wiring for the plug sockets.

Depends exactly how they're wired.

But anyway, I doubt they are going to bother doing this. My point is more that this aspect of the design is just sheer laziness and could have easily, at no added cost, been done correctly to start with.

 

[Agent_Squash]

If the trains were that bad why are 195 operated lines seeing massive growth?

 

[DustyBin]

Trying(!) to be completely objective, I think the 195s look and feel like the cheapest possible way to get new DMUs on the Northern network, which I suspect is exactly what they were/are. However they’re not that bad. The ride is poor, as seemingly is the build quality, but I can’t imagine the average passenger would notice to be honest. They also sound like a bus but only people like me would notice (or care about) such short comings.

I don’t think they’re particularly good trains, I personally don’t like them, and I think there’s a credible argument that a 158 provides a more pleasant passenger experience (route depending), but in reality they’re not as bad as some are making out.

 

[Watershed]

If the trains were that bad why are 195 operated lines seeing massive growth?

You have to consider the hypothetical alternative - a world in which these issues didn't exist. To be honest I don't think that rubbish ride quality or rock hard seats is going to be the biggest issue putting people off taking the train. But it's something that could so easily have been avoided with a bit of care and thought.

 

[507020]

If the trains were that bad why are 195 operated lines seeing massive growth?

Demand was likely heavily suppressed for many years by use of unbearable Pacers and lack of capacity on them, which has now been rectified with the provision of what is a sub-optimal DMU.

 

[Agent_Squash]

You have to consider the hypothetical alternative - a world in which these issues didn't exist. To be honest I don't think that rubbish ride quality or rock hard seats is going to be the biggest issue putting people off taking the train. But it's something that could so easily have been avoided with a bit of care and thought.

In a hypothetical world surely all these lines would be electrified and the 195s non existent?

In all seriousness, this thread at times has made the 195s out to be worse than Pacers - but outside of the rail enthusiast community I doubt many will be going ‘ooh, that was slightly rough over those points!’

 

[Killingworth]

In a hypothetical world surely all these lines would be electrified and the 195s non existent?

In all seriousness, this thread at times has made the 195s out to be worse than Pacers - but outside of the rail enthusiast community I doubt many will be going ‘ooh, that was slightly rough over those points!’

I first encountered a Pacer in 1985 but didn't ride them regularly until their last 5 years by which time they were only a step above the first car I bought, a venerable 1951 Morris Minor. But they kept on running. A 158 is great if I'm on a train with stops at least 20-30 minutes apart and it's not full. It's the loading factor when full to capacity with standees. The 195 scores for short hops and longer sections. It way out paces a Pacer for recovering time, and is a lot quieter.

 

[YorksLad12]

It can't be as bad as an 800. I've spilt hot tea over my lap thanks to how "lively" the ride is when sitting above the bogies on those.

Oh Lordy. In June I was travelling on coach B or C in a nine-car 80x, northbound from KX. I felt like a test pilot approaching Mach 2 whose aircraft was shaking itself apart. And a bit nauseous. A sort of Up-chuck Yeager.

 

[NewClee153]

Oh come on, if you can disregard all the short comings of a 150 just for the sake of a firm ride in the 195s, I'd call that an agenda. I won't list the shortcomings of a 150 because it's been done to death - if you can't objectively see how the 195s are leagues above them, then you're not taking a balanced view here.

And for a DMU, as is a 195.

Care to list the build quality issues, ride aside?

I think you've got to look at the ride quality issues from the perspective of what was attempting to be achieved; weight reduction for reduced track wear. To say what the units have managed to pack in, in terms of facilities etc for a given mass - I'd say they've done a pretty good job. If a firm ride is the only compromise for that, it's a compromise I can certainly live with.

Where exactly did I disregard the shortcomings of a 150? They are what they are, they’re 40 years old, and have served the railway well and should be withdrawn soon

I’ve heard some rattles and vibrating, among the horrible ride quality. Not too mention how cheap they look, tables that always look filthy and the crumb gap between the table and window pane

I think for a train built 3 years ago, they should ride much better than stock built 40 years ago. What they’re weighing doesn’t really bother me, I’m a passenger, all I want is a comfortable journey that the 195s don’t provide, and I certainly won’t compromise on my opinion on a train that is supposed to be “much better trains than every type of sprinter”. I look at the class 172 as a good example of a modern day DMU, for trains 9 years old than the civities, they put them to shame

As I’ve said, several times before, these are just my own observations, I appreciate they may not be for everyone, but I've ridden them enough times to gauge a general opinion, and that will not change

 

[XAM2175]

I think for a train built 3 years ago, they should ride much better than stock built 40 years ago. What they’re weighing doesn’t really bother me, I’m a passenger, all I want is a comfortable journey that the 195s don’t provide, and I certainly won’t compromise on my opinion on a train that is supposed to be “much better trains than every type of sprinter”.

Given that Network Rail's charging scheme actively incentivises weight reduction, especially in the bogies, you're going to need to get used to being disappointed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh Lordy. In June I was travelling on coach B or C in a nine-car 80x, northbound from KX. I felt like a test pilot approaching Mach 2 whose aircraft was shaking itself apart. And a bit nauseous. A sort of Up-chuck Yeager.

The only stock I have ever experienced anything that bad was Mk4s on the ECML somewhere around Durham. It was so rough that I had already decided to go and pull the handle if it didn't stop within a few seconds, which fortunately it did. It genuinely felt like a wheel had come off.

80x just feel like Desiros to me, a bit hard but not super rough. With 195s it is more the bangs which sound a bit like those of an ageing PEP EMU.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Aug 2022 ==

Given that Network Rail's charging scheme actively incentivises weight reduction, especially in the bogies, you're going to need to get used to being disappointed.

I'm not convinced they couldn't avoid the bangs and clunks without gaining much weight. That part seems poor design.

 

[NewClee153]

Given that Network Rail's charging scheme actively incentivises weight reduction, especially in the bogies, you're going to need to get used to being disappointed.

Regardless, I won’t be dumbing down my opinions

Given WMR's 196s are to enter service soon, and (even more frustratingly) the TfW stops at SGB are being replaced by WMR services to/from Shrewsbury, I’m going to need gritted teeth

 

[XAM2175]

I'm not convinced they couldn't avoid the bangs and clunks without gaining much weight. That part seems poor design.

Oh yes, CAF could have done better, but my comment relates to adoption of inside-frame bogies across the industry as a whole - so without an improvement in track quality across the board the stiffer ride, to one extent or another, is here to stay.

I've also said in previous discussions on this topic that I really don't see any huge issues with CAF's ride quality, and that's with a few 195 trips and solid chunk of 397 time under my belt, but again I accept that 110 mph on the WCML maybe doesn't test the setup in the same way that running on other lines does.