Best post-1998 built rolling stock for comfort

[northwichcat]

Based on passenger comfort only and ignoring the size of trains, which post-1998 built rolling stock would you prefer for a 2 hour journey? You can pick one diesel type and one electric type.

For diesel I would say 170. Comfortable seating and quiet engine for a diesel.

Tbh for an electric I haven't been on a post-1998 build I would like to be on. I would say 390 if they were refurbished with less seating and seating aligned to windows, otherwise a 350 if they had more comfortable 2+2 seating.

 

[142094]

333 for the electric, not sure about diesel.

 

[sprinterguy]

I'm inclined to agree with both jcollins and 142094: I would say 170s and 333s, they're both excellent trains, and the seating fitted as standard to many of the earlier Turbo sub-classes (170/1, 170/5 and 170/6 for a start, I can't remember whether the Scotrail units have the same type of seat since my last trip on one of their 170/4s) is particularly comfortable IMO.

The 180s are good too, I like the fact that the interior layout consists primarily of table bays lined up with the windows, and the seats are good too, but it's debateable whether one could remain operational for a whole two hours

 

[Class172]

I agree, 170s are very comfortable trains and the engine is very quiet usually. To be honest I haven't been on many post-1998 trains (as you can tell in my signature). Most comfortable electric train would be a pendolino (from my limited choice).

 

[futureA]

class 390

 

[sonic2009]

I would take a 170 over a 158, love the way on a 170s have comfortable seating than those buckets on some northern 158s

 

[Aictos]

Class 334 is comfortable as it has the right mix of seating and the 172 just to be different

 

[fgwrich]

For Mainland based DMUs - Its got to be a 180 for me, good fast comfortable units, with a far better interior layout than the likes of a Voyager or Meridian!

For non mainland based units, id have to say its got to be Translink / NI Railways CAF 3000 / 3CKs - For all the same reasons as the 332/333s!

EMU Wise - CAF 332 / 333. Good fast comfortable units, with a nice cool and quiet interior - and incredibly spacious interior too, with pretty high ceilings and deccent size lugguage racks - not even a patch on the cramped plastic offering from Bombardier (electrostar)!...Pretty close behind though, id have to admit is the Siemens Desiro family (444 / 350/1 & 450)

 

[Cherry_Picker]

I'd go with a 170 (and a 168, its essentially the same train) for diesels. They really are a pleasant place to be inside.

A Pendolino is nice if you get a window seat.

 

[driver9000]

I find the 180 a very comfortable train to travel on even in the airline seats. I recently caught a 334 and found it comfortable to travel Edinburgh to Glasgow on.

 

[Schnellzug]

I'd agree with 180s. It's a pity, I think, that delivery times and reliability were not as good as they could be, since they knock Voyagers into a cocked hat, if anyone was to ask me.

 

[Temple Meads]

Class 180 for sure, sadly we don't get them down my way now (HST's are better though).
Class 159's aren't bad, the 158's with FGW currently just don't have enough legroom for me, my legs are touching the seat in front.

I've never been in an electric () so can't comment on them.

 

[Drsatan]

For me, probably a 180, although a 175 (although I've never travelled on one) would probably provide the same level of comfort given they belong to the same family.

The most comfortable EMU I've travelled on would be a 450. Compared to 444s they feel a lot more spacious.

 

[Max]

Would probably be the 180s (or 175s) for me, much more pleasant than Voyagers. If only they worked properly!

The 170s are mixed in my view. Some are really comfortable (CrossCountry ones stand out for me), but the seats in the TPE 170s I find to be particularly firm and I never enjoy travelling on these.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Arriva's 175s are excellent (same as 180s really) for quiet, space and alignment.
170s have some good seats but too many are badly sited.
Priority seats in a 221 are very good too.
Somehow the 185, despite being very similar in layout to the electric 350/1, never seems to work for me seat-wise. Noisy and too many sight obstructions I think.

Probably 350/1 for electrics.
I've only had one ride in a 380 but they seem good too.
I like the priority seats in a 390.

It's very subjective, but the door warbles on the 221/390 are more bearable than the others on a journey with many stops - slightly more relaxed/musical.
On the other hand the intrusive rising alarm tones you keep hearing (toilets etc) are very annoying.

And I can't stand the KERRUMP of the Desiro doors crashing shut every 5 minutes.
They must have been told to emulate a Southern slam-door EMU and did it all too well.

 

[ainsworth74]

Best DMU for me has to be 180s very nice interior with comfy seating and not too much noise for a DMU but as others said it's just a shame about the reliability.

Best EMU I would say is the 332 standard class is about as good as most trains first class!

 

[anthony263]

diesel - crosscountry & London Midland class 170's and the class 175's. I havnt been on a class 180 so i cannot comment.

for electric I would have to say the class 332 for heathrow express

 

[Schnellzug]

Class 180 for sure, sadly we don't get them down my way now (HST's are better though).
Class 159's aren't bad, the 158's with FGW currently just don't have enough legroom for me, my legs are touching the seat in front.

I've never been in an electric () so can't comment on them.

I think the new seats that FGW put into the 158s are not bad; i always try to go for a table, so I rarely have complaints about legroom, mind.

 

[317666]

Comfort-wise, for DMU it would be 175 and for EMU it would be 444. (Although my favourite modern EMU is the 333, I think that 444s are more comfortable.)

 

[Greenback]

I would like to add my support for the 175's!

 

[anthony263]

I would like to add my support for the 175's!

best trains ATW have in terms of comfort, did do a long enough trip on the refurbished class 158's though so cannot comment on them

 

[Greenback]

best trains ATW have in terms of comfort, did do a long enough trip on the refurbished class 158's though so cannot comment on them

I haven't been on a refurbished 158 yet either, but I much preferred the 175's to the 158's, and I doubt the refurb will change my perception that much!

 

[lemonic]

You didn't specify it had to be UK-based rolling stock, so I will go for the ICE3! Comfortable, reclining seats with ample leg room as well as the wonderful ambience of the whole carriage: unbeatable!

 

[junglejames]

Most 170s for diesel. Electric is difficult as hardly any have had comfortable seats. I'll go with the only 2 I can think of with comfortable enough seats. Either a 375 (not a 375/9), Or a 333. Virtually everything else needs new seats in my opinion.

 

[thefab444]

I'd go for a 175/180 on the diesel front; if you ignore all the introduction and subsequent reliability problems they're actually pretty good trains from a passenger perspective. As for EMUs, the 333s seem popular and from my limited experience they are pretty good, but I'd rather not be on a train with 3+2 seating for two hours. I would say an original interior 442, but as it has to be current I'll go for a 444.

 

[AlterEgo]

Diesel - 222 (no argument1)
Electric - 390

 

[northwichcat]

You didn't specify it had to be UK-based rolling stock, so I will go for the ICE3! Comfortable, reclining seats with ample leg room as well as the wonderful ambience of the whole carriage: unbeatable!

Well I didn't although I was trying to get at post-BR stock.

I would rather see 4 car 170s on TPE. However, if a 4 car option of the Renfe MD R-599 was available as an option that'd be even better - they're very spacious internally and are utilised effectively on bendy, mountain climbing tracks where they are surprisingly quiet in operation.

http://www.renfe.com/EN/empresa/comunicacion/productos_trenes/md_599.html

 

[SprinterMan]

For electric, I'm gonna have to say Class 444s, they are magnificent and I actually prefer them to 442s in just about every way (as far as I can tell, this isn't a wide-held opinion, does anyone else agree with me?) and for Diesel stock, a tie between Class 175 and a lightly loaded Virgin 221 (I have never been on a 180 or 222).

 

[Schnellzug]

444s? They don't ride as well as 442s, and the air con is rather noisy, but the seats, while they may seem firm initially, aren't bad in terms of space & legroom, I think. You've got quite good visibility, since the window pillars are fairly narrow, which is also an advantage.

 

[strange6]

A 143 for me