Class 158 versus Class 170

[anthonycutt]

I'd only just learned that EastMidlandsTrains are using Class 158's exclusively on the Liverpool-Norwich route. At first I was disgusted: I always found Turbostars to be quiet, reliable & spacious, while Express Sprinter seemed to be relics of the 1980's.
But I travelled between Chestefield & Manchester today & the 158 was excellent. Quiet & very comfortable on the Hope Valley Line.

My question for you all is this: I have had the 158's wrong for all these years? And are the Turbostars really as good as I remember them?

 

[1D53]

Its primarily because EMT have 0 170's!

 

[Phoenix]

Well just from my own opinion I think 170's are much better I mean I travelled from Nuneaton to Stansted airport which was around 3.5 hours and it was so comfortable I meanaged to complete some A-level coursework.
As found of the vintage 158 some are I think they are not great to travel on at all okay there are some route where there pretty quite but on route where there is constant breaking and powering up then it can get very annoying.

 

[me123]

I've used both on FSR (although I've spent much longer in the turbos). I personally prefer the turbos which IMO are comfier, quieter and generally a better train. That said, I do quite like the FSR 158s which aren't bad (although the seating needs rethought - perhaps the refurbished units are better?).

TBH, the 170 is better suited to long distance travel than 158s, which aren't as comfy. But it would be easy enough to convert a 158 to have more comfortable seating.

All this is based purely on First Scotrail units: other TOCs may differ.

 

[222001]

I would choose a 170 over a 158. The ride on a 170 is better; they are also quieter - mainly as they do not have windows that can be opened in the carraiges. On the 158's I find that the seals on these windows are not as good as they should be and they let in quite a bit of sound.

 

[yorkie]

158s are a higher standard of train, although they are older. They are more early 90s than late 80s although construction did start in 1989.

They were designed for longer distance journeys, although nowadays you do find them on frequent stoppers especially on Northern.

The 170s were not designed for longer distance journeys really - you can tell this by the 1/3 2/3 door layout! But the design proved popular in the early years of post-privatisation and there was not many alternatives on offer.

SWT did the right thing getting rid of their 170s, and the 158s they got have been done up nicely.

 

[thefab444]

I agree, apart from the lack of legroom, the 158s are vastly superior to the 170s. God awful things, maybe it was just the SWT units, but they were pretty poor.

 

[me123]

I guess you've never been on a First Scotrail example? If not, I would recommend it next time you're in the area

 

[Galvanize]

Scotrail 170s, in my opinion are the best of the 170s! Most comfortable, and really suitable for the routes they operate, but they get crowded too easily.

158s of any kind, i think are absolutely awful trains, they're uncomfortable, noisy, air-conditioning never works, they smell in the summer, and doors are too slow to open!

 

[Doorslammer]

I'm more familiar with the 158s than the 170s. On the local line (Aberdeen to Inverness), I often saw both working the service, but I always felt the 170 was a touch overkill for a small service. Plus I reckon the 158 looked much tidier exterior wise.

 

[D9521]

Well arrivas 158's arn't TOO bad ive never really been as far on one as i have in a 170 but the 170's ive ridden on are owned by cross country and when they rev up they rattle and generally bug me which i havn't found on a 158.

I like the 158's more for the couple of opening windows because on a few occasions ive been too warm on a 170 and as for air con on the 158's i don't think arrivas air con breaks too much as when i did my work experience at canton we had 1 out of how ever many were out that had air con probs

So i'd choose a 158 over a 170

 

[FusionRail]

I have never ridden on a 158, 170's i dont think were too bad, when they were on the MML. Prefer a 170 to a 222 any day though.

 

[Mojo]

I would say though, that on many routes, the door layout on 158s causes very long dwell times meaning that frequently stopping services which have medium to high volumes of passengers are delayed easily.

 

[Aureol]

And now for a little known fact of the day:
158s run to a top speed of 90mph and can easily reach that (and more!) on their 90mph bogies.
170s have a capable top speed of 100mph but struggle to reach and maintain that speed due to them being on 75mph bogies.
Therefore, in terms of actual durability, the 158s win hands down, though I do agree that the 170s are much comfier.

 

[D9521]

Well 158's are very good with speed as i saw when a pacer was attached to the back and the driver had forgot and gone over the pacer limit and the engines were going mad to say the least

 

[Turbostar]

FSR 170's for me! Can't say a bad word about them when I was up in Scotland, clean tidy, comfortable.

 

[Max]

I think it really depends which 170s we are talking about. Some are nice. The declassified first class sections in the ex-MML 170s spring to mind - they are so comfy! However, I generally only get to experience the TPE 170s (ex-SWT), and god they are awful. Vibrating, uncomfortable and far too small. I would take a refurbished Northern 158 instead anyday!

 

[P156KWJ]

You'd be suprised to know that you can now find 156s on Liverpool-Norwich services, and they are quite good at timekeeping considering Grantham-Peterborough is 125mph when they can only reach 75mph.

 

[Aureol]

You'd be suprised to know that you can now find 156s on Liverpool-Norwich services, and they are quite good at timekeeping considering Grantham-Peterborough is 125mph when they can only reach 75mph.

A 156 on a Liverpool - Norwich service is rare.
It does happen, but very rarely.
I've only ever had one once, coupled to a 158.

 

[The Planner]

EMT are looking at using 222s on Liverpool - Norwich runs, not sure where they are finding them all from though.

 

[Aureol]

Speed restrictions on the 222 would mean that they would struggle keeping to time.
There are places where the linespeed limit is 80mph, but the HST speed limit is 90. 158s are allowed to use the 90 limit, but the 222s would be too heavy and would have to use the 80 limit.
Work that one out, EMT.

 

[adamp]

I always see EMT Liverpool L St. to Nottingham with a 158, coupled to a 156.
The 158's from central trains? are in an awful state, the seats are so uncomfy !

 

[The 158 Man]

The ex-Central 158s are abysmal. :roll:

But generally I'd a choose a 158 over a 170 anyday. 8)

 

[me123]

What you may forget is that (IIRC) the turbos can use higher linespeeds (HST speeds) going up to Aberdeen which actually renders them more suitible than the "intercity" 158s.

The other thing I like about the 170s is their versatility. They are well suited to the longer routes up here, but at the same time they can swap from an Aberdeen run to a Cumbernauld run and they perform equally well on each route! Again, FSR experience only.

 

[170399]

on the norwich-cambridge line i get EMT with 158s and NXEA with 170s and i always choose the 170 as it is reliable very light in the carriages and quick while the 158s are 9/10 late or cancelled and there only the 158s EMT got from central trains

 

[P156KWJ]

on the norwich-cambridge line i get EMT with 158s and NXEA with 170s and i always choose the 170 as it is reliable very light in the carriages and quick while the 158s are 9/10 late or cancelled and there only the 158s EMT got from central trains

or FGW / SWT if you're luckily

 

[jopsuk]

On Scotrail I certainly prefer the 170s-they seem a bit "lighter" and "airier"- not to mention that all the FSR 158s are 2 car versus 3 car for all their 170s.

Having moved down south and discovered that two-car 170s existed, I still can't shake the feeling that they look a bit goofy without the centre car. There's something not quite right.

 

[djw1981]

The 3car 170's are ideal for suburban work - 1/3 & 2/3 doors, but also for Interurban journeys e.g. Glasgow-Aberdeen/Inverness. The door seals are quite good, and since the train tends to stop at main stations only south of Perth, there is little in the way of draught and cold winds blowing around the cabin. With the commuter / local service north of Dundee, this is more of a problem, but the 158's have longer dwell times and lower speeds which can cause bigger problems. Also 1/3 & 2/3 doors tends to make for more even loading of the carriage whereas end doors on a 158 means people standing in the aisle at either end with empty seats in the middle.

158's are also very dark inside, which neither 156 or 170 are....

 

[Turbostar]

Whilst we're on the subject, I've just noticed a difference in the dimensions between the 170 & 171, with the 171 4-car being not so wide. Am I correct in thinking this is for the 4-car units to be able to run on the Uckfield & Oxted routes?

 

[466.networkers]

I think you're right there Mart.

Posted via Mobile Device