Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
As a further aside, why do modern seats have to have such high seat-backs? It's irrelevant to comfort, and just increases the sense of claustrophobia for anyone under 7 foot tall, especially with the airline-style unidirectional seat layout.
The 455s on SWT initially had low seat backs, there was a backlash and oon a refurbishment got new seats with higher seats backs, so all trains since have higher back seats.
The 455s on SWT initially had low seat backs, there was a backlash and oon a refurbishment got new seats with higher seats backs, so all trains since have higher back seats.
It is a crashworthiness issue. With low back seats, if you are sitting back to the direction of travel and there is a sudden stop due to a collision, your head would fly backwards and potentially cause neck or spinal damage, as the body isn't intended to bend that way. It also reduces the risk of people being thrown around the train.
The much maligned Fainsa-Compin "ironing board" seat fitted to the 700s does at least seek to reduce the claustrophobia issue by tapering at the top so you can see between the pair of seats. I find those in e.g. 222s much more claustrophobic as they do not have this feature.
Thankfully I don't travel on them anymore since they entered traffic but the interiors were nothing more than a clinical hospital room with no legroom next to the windows. Yes they were built for purpose but they weren't built for
Fair comment regarding love for metro trains - but its fair to say a good few people have strong feelings about 365s. I think the 333s are also a very strong contender for a well loved and broadly enjoyed metro type train.
Personally my favourite UK trains are 375/377s - I would much rather do London to Edinburgh on the 2+2 vehicles in one of those than an Azuma (though less said about the 3+2 interior the better). I guess thats partly why I'm so salty about the 700s, its such a stark contrast to the 377/5s.
Exactly. And there's an even stronger case for the 'Cambridge Cruisers' from Ely or Kings Lynn, which run non-stop between Cambridge and Kings Cross, yet in the last couple of years 700s have been increasingly used on these services, especially the Ely terminators.
I rarely go to London on a Saturday now, whereas not so long ago I went most weeks. The 700s are not the only reason for that but they are a factor - if I'm going for pleasure, I don't want to start the day with a miserable and uncomfortable 75 minutes journey, I'll go somewhere else or save my money.
Agreed, the loss of normal Victoria to Brighton trains and the supremacy of Thameslink as the main route from London to Brighton is very disappointing.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Yes the 375s are excellent too. I’m specifically talking about the early 377s with table seats, wide soft chairs and that nice soapy smell the carriages have.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Thanks for explaining this. So are the sensible seats in, say, 375/377s now considered non-crashworthy?
This leads to a wider issue of uncomfortable or unpleasant seating deterring train travel altogether, either increasing the volume of (far less safe) car journeys, or just stopping people making long, non-essential journeys (surely exactly what trains are for). I was put off these when FGW reseated their HSTs many years ago, with the dreaded high-backs and airline seating. A party of 6 unable to communicate with each other, or even see out of a window, for the whole journey. Most unpleasant and offputting.
Main point: carriage design and environment is such an important issue, too important to be left to civil servants or mechanical engineers.
Exactly. And there's an even stronger case for the 'Cambridge Cruisers' from Ely or Kings Lynn, which run non-stop between Cambridge and Kings Cross, yet in the last couple of years 700s have been increasingly used on these services, especially the Ely terminators.
I rarely go to London on a Saturday now, whereas not so long ago I went most weeks. The 700s are not the only reason for that but they are a factor - if I'm going for pleasure, I don't want to start the day with a miserable and uncomfortable 75 minutes journey, I'll go somewhere else or save my money.
Ironically, one could argue that 45 mins Cambridge to London on a 700 is fairly typical, something like Huntington to London is a lot longer.
The problem is that whilst people are making a case to say that TL journeys are essentially metro, a lot of people on the respective routes don’t consider their journey to be metro. I certainly don’t. My journey to London is just over half an hour, or 50 mins on a slower train. As far as I’m concerned, when I grew up it was never considered as a metro journey, it was very much “outer suburban”. If characteristics of the area have changed such that the area is now overpopulated enough to require metro-style trains to maintain capacity, then as far as I’m concerned that’s a government failure (of successive governments, though most of the rot seems to have set in during the Blair years).
The class 700 is just symbolic of a much wider problem. If we think back to 97, when the 365s were coming on stream (any coincidence with the year of a significant general election is merely coincidental!), the publicity was that new trains were going to be very much more comfortable than what came before - features like full carpeting, 2+2 seating etc etc. Fast forward a generation to the 700s and everything is debased and a downgrade. How is anyone supposed to see this as progress?
What is objectionable isn’t merely the 700, but the whole Thameslink concept. The same concept that now makes my local rail service utterly unreliable compared to what it was a decade ago. The 700 wouldn’t be nearly so bad if it just had the first-class interior all the way through the train, inter-car doors to stop noise propagating through the train, and carpets in the seating areas. And softer lighting, though this is a feature on many trains now and certainly isn’t unique to the 700. I often wear blue-light-blocking glasses at times when I know I’m going to be sleeping soon after travelling, it’s quite noticeable just how much the eyes squint upon taking them off when on a 700, except when the driver has thankfully selected the standby lighting mode which is so much better.
Ironically, one could argue that 45 mins Cambridge to London on a 700 is fairly typical, something like Huntington to London is a lot longer.
The problem is that whilst people are making a case to say that TL journeys are essentially metro, a lot of people on the respective routes don’t consider their journey to be metro. I certainly don’t. My journey to London is just over half an hour, or 50 mins on a slower train. As far as I’m concerned, when I grew up it was never considered as a metro journey, it was very much “outer suburban”. If characteristics of the area have changed such that the area is now overpopulated enough to require metro-style trains to maintain capacity, then as far as I’m concerned that’s a government failure (of successive governments, though most of the rot seems to have set in during the Blair years).
The class 700 is just symbolic of a much wider problem. If we think back to 97, when the 365s were coming on stream (any coincidence with the year of a significant general election is merely coincidental!), the publicity was that new trains were going to be very much more comfortable than what came before - features like full carpeting, 2+2 seating etc etc. Fast forward a generation to the 700s and everything is debased and a downgrade. How is anyone supposed to see this as progress?
Well quite. 10 years ago the East Coast had the 365s (pre refurbishment) and the comfortable class 321s. Ok the 317s weren’t great, but the first class seating area was wonderful.
I'm not a fan of those myself, they are a slightly unnatural shape for my back, specifically those in "first class" on 350s. Also the armrests are too high. However all that is personal opinion. In terms of crashworthiness I indeed think they would be seen as too low, though there are various heights of seat that are approved - the Sophia in particular is quite a bit lower than some other designs - though I suspect the whole design is taken into account when deciding rather than just a specific minimum height.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
This leads to a wider issue of uncomfortable or unpleasant seating deterring train travel altogether, either increasing the volume of (far less safe) car journeys, or just stopping people making long, non-essential journeys (surely exactly what trains are for). I was put off these when FGW reseated their HSTs many years ago, with the dreaded high-backs and airline seating. A party of 6 unable to communicate with each other, or even see out of a window, for the whole journey. Most unpleasant and offputting.
Yet some of us were big fans of that seat (the Grammar IC3000) and remain so, though I now prefer the similar one Avanti have fitted to their refurbs and new units which is similar but slightly more raked. The high density HST interiors were about capacity primarily for Reading commuters, who by number were (and may still be) the biggest users of GWR services, and thus did make sense, it was only when the much longer IETs were procured that some consideration could be given to lower density layouts with more tables - and indeed the IETs do have pleasantly low density interiors with lots of legroom even though I'm no great fan of the actual seat!
The thing I do think the designer should regret about the GWR HST refurbs is the horrible, overbright blue lighting. A cloudy day outside was warmer in colour. No new stock has yet replicated such an unpleasant environment, and it was made worse by the interior being painted a shade of light blue rather than the old warm magnolia-ish colour. Even the 700's lighting is nicer - not quite as blue, not quite as bright and with some shadowing which gives more of a quality feel.
The high density HST interiors were about capacity primarily for Reading commuters, who by number were (and may still be) the biggest users of GWR services, and thus did make sense
Of course there are many factors to be taken into consideration with carriage interior design, thanks again for explaining this. And I do find the IETs an improvement, though I realise this opinion may not be universal!
Well quite. 10 years ago the East Coast had the 365s (pre refurbishment) and the comfortable class 321s. Ok the 317s weren’t great, but the first class seating area was wonderful.
317s were the minority in any case. If you travelled long distance (ie Kings Lynn) or off-peak, your journey would almost certainly be 365. Granted the 3+2 on 317/321 wasn’t nice when all seats were taken, but it did at least mean more people were seated, and was only an issue for a handful of high-peak services.
What is galling is that every generation of stock has previously represented progress. You could make a case to say that a 700 is progress over a 319 on the more established TL routes. But they are very definitely a step backwards over 365s. Whatever the reasons behind this, rightly or wrongly, it represents a downgrade. If things in life are going backwards then it’s reasonable to question what’s going on at a government level, as indeed many people are nowadays doing.
Longer yes, but at least those services have a number of intermediate stops, so there is at least *some* (though not a lot!) argument to be made for the 'getting passengers on and off quickly' priority that seems to have trumped all else when it comes to the 700s. The 'advantages' of shorter dwell times aren't an advantage on a non-stop service (!), and as that's about the only plus point that the 700s seem to have going for them, and many of the compromises made to passenger comfort are supposed to be to facilitate that, then it should be clear they are totally unsuitable to be running 'Cambridge Cruiser' services. And yet here we are.
The class 700 is just symbolic of a much wider problem. If we think back to 97, when the 365s were coming on stream (any coincidence with the year of a significant general election is merely coincidental!), the publicity was that new trains were going to be very much more comfortable than what came before - features like full carpeting, 2+2 seating etc etc. Fast forward a generation to the 700s and everything is debased and a downgrade. How is anyone supposed to see this as progress?
Totally agree - though I'd also argue that the issues here are not just confined to the railway or to the transport sector as a whole, but society-wide. We seem to have given up on being able to expect that things will get better over time, indeed most things barely work at all anymore and show no signs of improving. The attitude now seems to be that you get what you're given, pay through the nose for it even though it is worse than what you had previously and you paid considerably less for it back then, and if you don't like it, tough. The 700s vs 365s (or 379s/387s, which I'm quite happy with apart from the awful ride quality) is a rather good example of that.
What is objectionable isn’t merely the 700, but the whole Thameslink concept. The same concept that now makes my local rail service utterly unreliable compared to what it was a decade ago.
I'd say so too - I've never thought that being able to avoid the rather minor occasional inconvenience of having to cross the road between Kings Cross and St Pancras to change trains is remotely worth the problems or costs that Thameslink has caused to the GN side since 2018.
The 700 wouldn’t be nearly so bad if it just had the first-class interior all the way through the train, inter-car doors to stop noise propagating through the train, and carpets in the seating areas. And softer lighting, though this is a feature on many trains now and certainly isn’t unique to the 700.
Again, agree. I really do find them an unpleasant environment in their current state, to the degree I'm actively avoiding using them for leisure travel wherever possible.
I don't agree with those advocating carpet. Carpet on regional trains invariably gets filthy and damaged and makes the train look really filthy as well as being unsanitary. Vinyl, ideally in a pattern like fake wood, is far preferable for this application.
I don't agree with those advocating carpet. Carpet on regional trains invariably gets filthy and damaged and makes the train look really filthy as well as being unsanitary. Vinyl, ideally in a pattern like fake wood, is far preferable for this application.
Indeed, the floor cleanliness of the 700s is generally OK partly because the floor can be accessed easier as the seats are cantilevered from the sides of the cars. most of the soiling problem is not just dust and grime from passengers' footwear, but deliberate depositing of litter such as food wrappers, fruit skins/cores, paper and plastic cups, and even uneaten food, - the trains don't strew this detritus around themselves, and passengers that do have no excuse doing it even if the waste bins are full.
Totally agree - though I'd also argue that the issues here are not just confined to the railway or to the transport sector as a whole, but society-wide. We seem to have given up on being able to expect that things will get better over time, indeed most things barely work at all anymore and show no signs of improving. The attitude now seems to be that you get what you're given, pay through the nose for it even though it is worse than what you had previously and you paid considerably less for it back then, and if you don't like it, tough. The 700s vs 365s (or 379s/387s, which I'm quite happy with apart from the awful ride quality) is a rather good example of that.
100% agree. Same in many areas of life these days. As you say, pay through the nose, yet what comes out the other side is worse than what you would have got a generation ago. It’s not unreasonable to ask what on earth has been going on with the way this country has been run.
I'd say so too - I've never thought that being able to avoid the rather minor occasional inconvenience of having to cross the road between Kings Cross and St Pancras to change trains is remotely worth the problems or costs that Thameslink has caused to the GN side since 2018.
Agreed again. The small benefit of the occasional through journey, versus a whole list of problems - not least some utterly excruciating journeys during the regular occasions when the whole service melts down.
Again, agree. I really do find them an unpleasant environment in their current state, to the degree I'm actively avoiding using them for leisure travel wherever possible.
One thing which really annoys me is when people say “I find the 700s okay”, and in the next breath we find they always travel in declassified first. Lucky enough if you can get it, and in fact at the times I travel on the rare occasions I use a 700 I have no problem in getting the same. But this is only a fraction of the whole train, and most people aren’t able to get it. In fact, the only reason most people can get it now is because it is still something of a secret to the average Joe Public. IMO anyone who advocates the class 700 interior but uses declassified first essentially renders their opinion invalid. First is a completely different experience, it lacks many of the issues present elsewhere in the train, and you’re tucked away at one end so only have noise travelling from one direction.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I don't agree with those advocating carpet. Carpet on regional trains invariably gets filthy and damaged and makes the train look really filthy as well as being unsanitary. Vinyl, ideally in a pattern like fake wood, is far preferable for this application.
The carpet on the 365s was fine, and these trains were very intensively used during their time on GN. I actually find the opposite - vinyl flooring can look absolutely disgusting when it’s got a few stains on it, whereas good carpet tended to hide dirt. The carpet on the 365 managed to last about 8 years (IIRC - someone may have the more exact dates), so not exactly a great outlay to have to replace it 4-5 times in a fleet’s lifespan. The class 700 flooring reminds of Travelodge bathrooms, really not a high-quality civilised ambience we should be striving for.
100% agree. Same in many areas of life these days. As you say, pay through the nose, yet what comes out the other side is worse than what you would have got a generation ago. It’s not unreasonable to ask what on earth has been going on with the way this country has been run.
Agreed again. The small benefit of the occasional through journey, versus a whole list of problems - not least some utterly excruciating journeys during the regular occasions when the whole service melts down.
One thing which really annoys me is when people say “I find the 700s okay”, and in the next breath we find they always travel in declassified first. Lucky enough if you can get it, and in fact at the times I travel on the rare occasions I use a 700 I have no problem in getting the same. But this is only a fraction of the whole train, and most people aren’t able to get it. In fact, the only reason most people can get it now is because it is still something of a secret to the average Joe Public. IMO anyone who advocates the class 700 interior but uses declassified first essentially renders their opinion invalid. First is a completely different experience, it lacks many of the issues present elsewhere in the train, and you’re tucked away at one end so only have noise travelling from one direction.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The carpet on the 365s was fine, and these trains were very intensively used during their time on GN. I actually find the opposite - vinyl flooring can look absolutely disgusting when it’s got a few stains on it, whereas good carpet tended to hide dirt. The carpet on the 365 managed to last about 8 years (IIRC - someone may have the more exact dates), so not exactly a great outlay to have to replace it 4-5 times in a fleet’s lifespan. The class 700 flooring reminds of Travelodge bathrooms, really not a high-quality civilised ambience we should be striving for.
One thing which really annoys me is when people say “I find the 700s okay”, and in the next breath we find they always travel in declassified first. Lucky enough if you can get it, and in fact at the times I travel on the rare occasions I use a 700 I have no problem in getting the same. But this is only a fraction of the whole train, and most people aren’t able to get it. In fact, the only reason most people can get it now is because it is still something of a secret to the average Joe Public. IMO anyone who advocates the class 700 interior but uses declassified first essentially renders their opinion invalid. First is a completely different experience, it lacks many of the issues present elsewhere in the train, and you’re tucked away at one end so only have noise travelling from one direction.
Well that doesn't apply to me much these days as I sometimes have a problem walking the distance to the rear. The issue on the MML side trains is really down to the sheer demand from a frequently maxed-out capacity. Even if the full electrification had proceeded, the fast Thameslinks were always looking at an ever-increasing overload situation. There was some grumbling when the 700s were introduced but their performance in the high peaks is now appreciated. When the panic buy of 377/5s and 387s came, the quieter (than 319) trains were seen as a benefit, but when there was a significant number of standees, they could be hell, dwells got worse with slow plug doors, inability to pass along the gangway and crushing in the door vestibules. All this created more delays for everybody. That just doesn't happen now, Bedford passengers know that they will get seats coming south and if standing from the core going northwards in the evening, will get seats 20mins later at St Albans.
As far as the long distance travellers on the Ely to Kings Lynn section go, I know that it a tedious journey - even in an empty Electrostar, (I'm actually away on a break near Sandringham at the moment) but those who are choosing to live here and work that far south should consider the rail service as it is and not how it was or how they might want it.
The carpet on the 365s was fine, and these trains were very intensively used during their time on GN. I actually find the opposite - vinyl flooring can look absolutely disgusting when it’s got a few stains on it, whereas good carpet tended to hide dirt. The carpet on the 365 managed to last about 8 years (IIRC - someone may have the more exact dates), so not exactly a great outlay to have to replace it 4-5 times in a fleet’s lifespan. The class 700 flooring reminds of Travelodge bathrooms, really not a high-quality civilised ambience we should be striving for.
In my experience carpet is good at hiding dust, which is good for domestic use if you can't be bothered Hoovering daily. However it isn't good at hiding stuff like mud, dog dirt and coffee spill stains, which are what you're more likely to get on a train.
In my experience carpet is good at hiding dust, which is good for domestic use if you can't be bothered Hoovering daily. However it isn't good at hiding stuff like mud, dog dirt and coffee spill stains, which are what you're more likely to get on a train.
This is a photo from Wikipedia of a class 365 in original condition. As can be seen from the posters, this is into FCC days, so this interior has already seen potentially 8-10 years of service. Looks pretty spotless to me.
This is a photo from Wikipedia of a class 365 in original condition. As can be seen from the posters, this is into FCC days, so this interior has already seen potentially 8-10 years of service. Looks pretty spotless to me.
I think this is one reason why people are quite annoyed about losing the 365s. Despite being something of bodge from the 465s, the interior was very much got right originally. FCC’s refurbishment was reasonably okay as well, though I found the colour scheme a bit dreary, but that’s personal taste. They were a great train to travel in, and were reasonably at home on metro, inner suburban, outer suburban and express work.
To be fair, I have seen the messy carpets on the EMR 360s. Not sure if these are original or later refit? But to be honest I’d still find this preferable to the Travelodge bathroom on the 700. Something about it just looks and feels rancid, whether clean or dirty. Plus no matter what state, it absorbs sound.
One thing which really annoys me is when people say “I find the 700s okay”, and in the next breath we find they always travel in declassified first. Lucky enough if you can get it, and in fact at the times I travel on the rare occasions I use a 700 I have no problem in getting the same. But this is only a fraction of the whole train, and most people aren’t able to get it. In fact, the only reason most people can get it now is because it is still something of a secret to the average Joe Public. IMO anyone who advocates the class 700 interior but uses declassified first essentially renders their opinion invalid. First is a completely different experience, it lacks many of the issues present elsewhere in the train, and you’re tucked away at one end so only have noise travelling from one direction.
Why ever would that be the case? If someone is going to advocate that they find something satisfactory, the optics aren’t good to then find that they aren’t actually using the product themselves, in this case by making a very active and conscious choice to avoid it.
Personally I prefer Standard. The declassified first has a variant of the Fainsa Sophia seat (though the frame is more like the Compin as it's an earlier design) that suffers the usual "metal bar" problem these seats have and is thus getting a bit uncomfortable as the cushions collapse over time, though they didn't exhibit the problem initially.
I don't mind hard seats, I do mind seats where you can feel the framework through the cushion.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I think this is one reason why people are quite annoyed about losing the 365s. Despite being something of bodge from the 465s, the interior was very much got right originally. FCC’s refurbishment was reasonably okay as well, though I found the colour scheme a bit dreary, but that’s personal taste. They were a great train to travel in, and were reasonably at home on metro, inner suburban, outer suburban and express work.
They’re extremely dull. Dull livery, dull interiors, they had a sharp plastic smell for a long time and the, you know, seat issue. I remember hearing a conversation with a few people on an SWR train last year who referred to the Thameslink trains as “those horrible grey trains”.
IMO nothing after privatisation can beat the 377/1
That's a fair point - the 444 is about as good a long distance unit as I've seen in recent years. The 80x and 397 are close to being the OHLE powered "Class 344" I wish we had, but they don't *quite* get there.
Only shame is the ruined First Class which is in my opinion inferior to Standard, and it could do with a couple of luggage racks in each coach.
Personally I prefer the Connex-interior 375s. It’s rather ironic that one of the most hated TOCs of all time managed to specify one of the best train interiors ever seen. I don’t think going back through this forum one will find many criticisms of the early Electrostar interiors, which is quite something really.
Personally I prefer the Connex-interior 375s. It’s rather ironic that one of the most hated TOCs of all time managed to specify one of the best train interiors ever seen. I don’t think going back through this forum one will find many criticisms of the early Electrostar interiors, which is quite something really.
I would say too many table seats, as I prefer airline. Though a small number of sets have the 2+2 layout with a mix of airline and table, and I like those ones. You don't see them often though so it must only be a few. They also have poor luggage space because the overheads are tiny, which is normally OK (most people on Southern services are day tripping) but is a pain for Gatwick. The 700s probably do better for Gatwick/Luton as you have standbacks, floor level racks AND generous overheads.
This is a photo from Wikipedia of a class 365 in original condition. As can be seen from the posters, this is into FCC days, so this interior has already seen potentially 8-10 years of service. Looks pretty spotless to me.
That's the condition I remember when commuting early on, and purposely waiting for one over the other stock.
But as we know they dumbed the interior down later on, and removed some of the carpet too. It ended up looking more like the 700 by being more colourless and generic.
That's the condition I remember when commuting early on, and purposely waiting for one over the other stock.
But as we know they dumbed the interior down later on, and removed some of the carpet too. It ended up looking more like the 700 by being more colourless and generic.
They looked and felt so good when new. The original interior was so restful. It gives the look and feel of a civilised train, as opposed to a chaotic NHS hospital waiting room that standard class in the 700 feels like.
Agree the "dumbing down" spoiled them, though they were still quite nice to travel in. I always found the vinyl flooring had a noticeable smell to it, especially when wet.
They looked and felt so good when new. The original interior was so restful. It gives the look and feel of a civilised train, as opposed to a chaotic NHS hospital waiting room that standard class in the 700 feels like.
Agree the "dumbing down" spoiled them, though they were still quite nice to travel in. I always found the vinyl flooring had a noticeable smell to it, especially when wet.
Southern’s 377 interior is wonderful too. So sensorially undemanding. I prefer waiting for the half-hourly southern train to London Bridge than getting the Overground
Arguably for seats, the 700s are a poor solution for bums on seats, and perhaps the absence of full and standing trains is more a reflection of the change in usage patterns post covid.
There isnt an absence of full and standing trains operated by 700s by any measure. What is absent now is those trains leaving people behind in the peaks because people can’t board, which was a daily occurence with the 319s / 377s on the MML / BML / Sutton loop even when a few of them went to 12 car.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
www.modernrailways.com
