Unpopular opinion: IETs are perfectly fine, for the most part.

rmHawk765 · Monday at 12:13

befated said:
I was surprised to have a far worse experience on one of their 387s (where the seat was very much ironing board style) as nobody complains about them.

The seat back on 387s is a bit of an ironing board but overall the seat design on them isn't too shabby (and after all they're commuter units). The interior atmosphere is leagues ahead of an IET anyway.

There is a reason why us Great Northern lurkers are rather annoyed at the fact that many 387 diagrams here have now switched to 700s... it might not seem like a noteworthy change but 700s are considerably worse (somehow). The irony of this being my 700th message...

RailUK Forums

contrex · Monday at 13:32

6Gman said:
but excrement off a spade comes to mind.

Shed off a shovel?

35B · Monday at 13:52

The OP is welcome to their view. As an ECML user, my own view is that IET is a mediocre train to travel in, that represents a deterioration in the standards that we customers are to be entitled to.

As a piece of traction, they are good and a welcome upgrade on what they replace. They allow acceleration of services and the bi-mode capability offers some useful gains in operating range. However, that gain is marginal and the performance issues on GWR and EMR show the limitations of bi-mode.

It is the passenger environment that lets them down. I like the airy bodyshell, and the seat pitch is an improvement on what was there before. But that's where the good news ends. The ride is appalling, and I have seen a number of people looking alarmed at bogie hunting on plain line. Then you have the seats. They are very uncomfortable, hard, and stiff - to say they're better than the 700s is symptomatic of the problem, as front line intercity trains should not be compared with the worst seating on the network.

I have then had too many journeys with heating either too high or, more often, too cold. Guards have had to apologise for this, blaming either coming straight off depot (perhaps) or inability to control the thermostat (more plausible, especially when the train stays cold the whole journey).

I might be tempted to overlook the procurement if it weren't for the fact that these trains cost a lot more than their predecessors, to deliver something no better.

Clansman · Monday at 13:56

Poor build quality, carriages too long and too narrow. That's the downfall of the IETs for me, rather than simply the interior specifications.

UK rolling stock strategy should really be aiming to sacrifice carriage length in exchange for maximum height and width to get as much from the loading gauge as possible. As opposed to
always aiming to cram as much into tight spaces and be confined to arbitrary infrastructure constraints like London terminal platform lengths (which in any other country would have been extended long ago).

The IETs are just a symbol of everything that is wrong and backward with the industry compared to our European counterparts. Technologically capable but sacrifices everything else in doing so.

Bletchleyite · Monday at 13:56

35B said:
It is the passenger environment that lets them down. I like the airy bodyshell, and the seat pitch is an improvement on what was there before. But that's where the good news ends. The ride is appalling, and I have seen a number of people looking alarmed at bogie hunting on plain line.

The Mk4 is worse. The only time I've ever been on a train riding so badly I was giving serious consideration to going and pulling the handle as I suspected a derailment was on a Mk4 on the ECML. Yes, Pacers are bouncy but this was something else.

One could certainly say that the IET isn't as good as something like the ICE3. But it's better, in my view, than anything BR ever built other than possibly the Class 158. The Mk4 is particular junk, built down to a price and with few redeeming features*, but I don't get the love for the Mk3 either. The Eurofima coaches and similar (e.g. the DB IC1) are much better. At least BR could have made the Mk3 as good as the International Coach of the time.

* Yes, I'll give people that the seats installed at refurb are quite good, but legroom is poor and the originals were terrible.

The Pelican · Monday at 13:59

I quite like the IETs on the GWR, where they resemble a bimode version of a Class 180 Adelante, which in turn was a DMU version of an HST. They are a small downgrade on a GNER Mk4 coach on the East coast.

35B · Monday at 14:00

Bletchleyite said:
The Mk4 is worse. The only time I've ever been on a train riding so badly I was giving serious consideration to going and pulling the handle as I suspected a derailment was on a Mk4 on the ECML. Yes, Pacers are bouncy but this was something else.

One could certainly say that the IET isn't as good as something like the ICE3. But it's better, in my view, than anything BR ever built other than possibly the Class 158. The Mk4 is particular junk, built down to a price and with few redeeming features*, but I don't get the love for the Mk3 either. The Eurofima coaches and similar (e.g. the DB IC1) are much better.

* Yes, I'll give people that the seats installed at refurb are quite good, but legroom is poor and the originals were terrible.

I find that view interesting, as I regard the Mk4 as significantly better riding than the IET - to the extent that I still choose Mk4s over IETs given the option, and not for enthusiast reasons.

AHBD · Monday at 15:57

They lose lots of marks for their cramped vertical bicycle storage for 1.5 bikes....

81A · Monday at 16:05

I very much like the IETs (though definitely have nostalgia for HSTs and even turbos as an enthusiast).

They have been around long enough in GWR land that they have become very much a feature of the railway landscape, and I have taken enough comfortable, pleasant and interesting journeys on them to make them some of my favourite classes.

HSTEd · Monday at 16:52

35B said:
It is the passenger environment that lets them down. I like the airy bodyshell, and the seat pitch is an improvement on what was there before. But that's where the good news ends. The ride is appalling, and I have seen a number of people looking alarmed at bogie hunting on plain line.

As someone who has travelled fairly regularly on the ECML since the late 1990s, I can't say the ride is any worse than the Mark 4s the IEPs replaced.

Bletchleyite · Monday at 16:53

HSTEd said:
As someone who has travelled fairly regularly on the ECML since the late 1990s, I can't say the ride is any worse than the Mark 4s the IEPs replaced.

I personally think it's better. IETs don't ride well, but in my book they ride better than Mk4s.

rmHawk765 · Monday at 16:55

What do the IETs ride like on the WCML fasts? That's basically the best track in the country, though I haven't had a chance to catch an 805 or 807 yet.

The GWML for instance has absolutely horrific track quality so in my experience any train rides horrifically on it. The ECML is just meh, perhaps the IETs exacerbated the situation but I can't say there's an enormous difference between Mk4s and IETs (though the IETs are worse nonetheless).

Bletchleyite · Monday at 16:58

rmHawk765 said:
What do the IETs ride like on the WCML fasts? That's basically the best track in the country, though I haven't had a chance to catch an 805 or 807 yet.

Very similar to a 350 or 730, which on that track is pretty smooth. Indeed for years I called for there to be a "Class 344" i.e. a 25kV version of the 444, and the IET is close enough to being that to be honest.

Sealink · Monday at 17:01

On the subject of seats, the worst I have experienced are the Caledonian Sleeper ones. But they are cheap for the distance travelled!

Bletchleyite · Monday at 17:03

Sealink said:
On the subject of seats, the worst I have experienced are the Caledonian Sleeper ones. But they are cheap for the distance travelled!

They are the same as the first class seats in IETs. I generally don't consider them to be good enough to be worth upgrading.

Sorcerer · Monday at 17:13

rmHawk765 said:
What do the IETs ride like on the WCML fasts? That's basically the best track in the country, though I haven't had a chance to catch an 805 or 807 yet.

You might notice when going around corners if you see your phone sliding across the table slightly , but the ride quality is otherwise perfectly sufficient in my experience.

35B · Monday at 17:45

HSTEd said:
As someone who has travelled fairly regularly on the ECML since the late 1990s, I can't say the ride is any worse than the Mark 4s the IEPs replaced.

All I can say is that I'm very surprised - and that the differences have been observed not just by enthusiasts, but also irregular travellers.

43096 · Monday at 18:04

35B said:
All I can say is that I'm very surprised - and that the differences have been observed not just by enthusiasts, but also irregular travellers.

Anyone who thinks the ride on an 80x is anywhere near acceptable has clearly taken leave of their senses, or has at least forgotten what a good ride is.

ECML ride quality is IET worst > Mark 4 better > then a very very very big gap to the Mark 3, which remains the gold standard.

Sir Felix Pole · Monday at 18:15

I travel regularly between Paddington and Exeter / Plymouth and I can't stand the bl**dy things! The seat issue is well known, but the ride quality on the lightweight bogies is absolutely appalling. Admittedly the track quality on the Berks & Hants is not the best, but the IETs are far worse than ever the HSTs were. They are underpowered on the Devon Banks and the interior is cheap and nasty with rattling panels and manky carpets. And how are they getting on with the body / bogie cracking issue - I honestly don't think they will last the 30 yrs or so projected in front-line service?

bramling · Monday at 18:49

35B said:
I find that view interesting, as I regard the Mk4 as significantly better riding than the IET - to the extent that I still choose Mk4s over IETs given the option, and not for enthusiast reasons.

I never found the Mk4s rough riding. I’d agree with the general view that the IET is really mediocre, especially from the passenger point of view. Personally I’d prefer an IC225 (although this has been spoiled by the recent shortening), and it isn’t as though the Mk4 was perfect especially due to its tilting profile.

I wouldn’t be surprised that the various IET fleets turn into a serious liability over time, they don’t give a feeling of having a particularly good build quality, which is particularly regrettable given how much they have ended up costing.

Bald Rick · Monday at 19:39

rmHawk765 said:
but as for the seats, I'm one of the odd few out who doesn't really care

You’re not the ‘odd few out’, you are part of a silent super-majority. Most passengers coudln’t give two hoots.

35B · Monday at 19:45

Bald Rick said:
You’re not the ‘odd few out’, you are oart of a silent super-majority. Most passengers coudln’t give two hoots.

Hmmm, I think that's an underestimate - most just put up with it.

HSTEd · Monday at 20:24

35B said:
All I can say is that I'm very surprised - and that the differences have been observed not just by enthusiasts, but also irregular travellers.

Back in the GNER and National Express era I recall quite regularly geting jolts of the suspension hitting the end of travel and endless creaking noises near Hatfield.

I will say one of the smoothest experiences I ever had on the line was the Hull Trains Class 86 and Mark 3 set that was used to cover for a train being out of action for a while.

However, as another point of comparison, an IEP is far superior to my last experience of first class on a Class 180 on the route - Hull Train's 180s didn't have the tables fully secured to the vehicle side, and the table I was sitting at (on the single seat side) got into resonance with the engine and was shaking an inch back and forth for several minutes.

Bald Rick · Monday at 20:28

35B said:
Hmmm, I think that's an underestimate - most just put up with it.

Most don’t notice. Or if they do, not enough to pass any comment.

35B · Monday at 20:42

HSTEd said:
Back in the GNER and National Express era I recall quite regularly geting jolts of the suspension hitting the end of travel and endless creaking noises near Hatfield.

I will say one of the smoothest experiences I ever had on the line was the Hull Trains Class 86 and Mark 3 set that was used to cover for a train being out of action for a while.

However, as another point of comparison, an IEP is far superior to my last experience of first class on a Class 180 on the route - Hull Train's 180s didn't have the tables fully secured to the vehicle side, and the table I was sitting at (on the single seat side) got into resonance with the engine and was shaking an inch back and forth for several minutes.

The 180s had many issues, especially near the end of their time with HT. But the issues weren't fundamentally about the train, but individual circumstances.

speedy1 · Monday at 20:48

Don't know how anyone can sit on a metal bar on the 802s and think "this is fine" and not "is this a 1950s third-class seat with a bit of hostile architecture thrown in?"

Bletchleyite · Monday at 21:02

speedy1 said:
Don't know how anyone can sit on a metal bar on the 802s and think "this is fine" and not "is this a 1950s third-class seat with a bit of hostile architecture thrown in?"

I think it may depend how heavy you are as to whether you compress the cushion enough to feel it.

At 20 stone I definitely do!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Monday at 21:03 ==

HSTEd said:
However, as another point of comparison, an IEP is far superior to my last experience of first class on a Class 180 on the route - Hull Train's 180s didn't have the tables fully secured to the vehicle side, and the table I was sitting at (on the single seat side) got into resonance with the engine and was shaking an inch back and forth for several minutes.

This was because it had a floating floor to insulate the diesel noise, so you couldn't connect them to both the floor and the wall as they moved relative to each other. It's interesting that most modern units (except IETs) do the opposite and only connect them to the body side.

Starmill · Monday at 21:10

Bletchleyite said:
I find the small toilet doors on 80x better than most others. The handles are robust (if a little difficult to use at times) and the sliding door is better than a hinged one if you're trying to get in there with luggage.

They're so uncomfortably small I'd never dream of taking a bag in there. If you did you'd risk pressing the call for aid or toilet flush button with it. Also, there's nowhere you can place a small suitcase or large backpack that won't be doused in other people's waste water.

This is actually one of the key reasons why I refuse to do work on trains, and always go to every effort to leave my laptop in the office wherever I possibly can, so as not to be responsible for it. I don't need much encouragement though given the number of long distance trains without a table a laptop could fit onto, no at-seat catering services, no charging socket and with wifi so slow I'd be better off using a 3g modem from 2006.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Monday at 21:15 ==

35B said:
The OP is welcome to their view. As an ECML user, my own view is that IET is a mediocre train to travel in, that represents a deterioration in the standards that we customers are to be entitled to.

As a piece of traction, they are good and a welcome upgrade on what they replace. They allow acceleration of services and the bi-mode capability offers some useful gains in operating range. However, that gain is marginal and the performance issues on GWR and EMR show the limitations of bi-mode.

It is the passenger environment that lets them down. I like the airy bodyshell, and the seat pitch is an improvement on what was there before. But that's where the good news ends. The ride is appalling, and I have seen a number of people looking alarmed at bogie hunting on plain line. Then you have the seats. They are very uncomfortable, hard, and stiff - to say they're better than the 700s is symptomatic of the problem, as front line intercity trains should not be compared with the worst seating on the network.

I have then had too many journeys with heating either too high or, more often, too cold. Guards have had to apologise for this, blaming either coming straight off depot (perhaps) or inability to control the thermostat (more plausible, especially when the train stays cold the whole journey).

I might be tempted to overlook the procurement if it weren't for the fact that these trains cost a lot more than their predecessors, to deliver something no better.

Exactly. They're great trains for £15.99 plus extras Ryanair style fares. £165 one way? Less so...

ENC Rail · Monday at 21:37

Personally I really like them! (controversial, I know

)

I've done plenty of trips on LNER Azumas in standard class, with some longer ones from Yorkshire to London and Edinburgh and I've never found the seats to be an issue. As for the TPE ones, I found them to be comfortable enough, though I'm yet to do a longer trip on a TPE 802 as I've only been between York, Leeds and Huddersfield on them (again, in standard class). The other IETs I've been on are GWR, though as I only travelled between Torquay and Paignton I didn't have time to experience them properly!

It seems to me like they are a huge upgrade for normal passengers, with most non-enthusiasts I have spoken to preferring the Azumas over the 225s. I remember returning from a trip to London a few years back one of my relatives (who isn't and enthusiast) said they much preferred the Azuma we arrived on over the 225 we went back on, with them saying it felt more modern and clean.

I also like the fact that they are bi-mode, so no running diesel under wires like the trains they replaced (except TPE and Avanti in some areas, though on the whole they run on electric under wires far more than not). If only the GWR electrification happened as planned...

dodecahedron67 · Monday at 21:59

35B said:
I have then had too many journeys with heating either too high or, more often, too cold. Guards have had to apologise for this, blaming either coming straight off depot (perhaps) or inability to control the thermostat (more plausible, especially when the train stays cold the whole journey).

You can thank Hitachi and the maintenance contracts for that.

It is entirely possible to change the HVAC temperature to 0.5°C increments manually, however Hitachi do not like it if you do this. Much like they don’t like you fixing anything yourself on them, like a toilet locking itself out. Fine if they’ve set it to the right temperature before it comes off the depot in the morning. Less fine if they haven’t, which is the case 90% of the time.

All it needs is one different log in to the TMS and magically you can change the HVAC temp!

Whether or not TMs/guards are willing to fob Hitachi off by putting passenger comfort over Hitachi comfort is another matter. Personally, I always did, and it was the first thing I would do after taking over a train

Unpopular opinion: IETs are perfectly fine, for the most part.

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member