Class 80x / IET Hate

[charlier]

Hi, so I've been looking around the forum for a while before I made my account, but this is my first actual post.

I've realised everyone always SWEARS that the class 80x is bad, or it's uncomfy, like they try to bring up every reason saying it's bad or worse than older stock.

I don't understand, they have so many new features compared to older stock, like you can TELL it's more advanced and upgraded.

I find them way better to travel on than other trains, it's not loud or hot or anything that makes it uncomfy in any way. I just can't understand it because everyone that has some sort of interest in trains ALWAYS has something bad to say about it, acting like they got personally insulted by the train itself like a grudge.. it's so weird, it feels like I missed a secret meeting where we all pretend they are awful.

 

[800Travel]

hi, so I've been looking around the forum for a while before I had an account but this is my first actual post.

I've realised everyone always SWEARS that the class 80x is bad or it's uncomfy, like they try to bring up every reason saying it's bad or worse than older stock. I don't understand, they have so many new features compared to older stock, like you can TELL its more advanced and upgraded. I find them way better to travel on than other trains, it's not loud or hot or anything that makes it uncomfy in any way. I just can't understand it because everyone that has some sort of interest in trains ALWAYS has something bad to say about it, acting like they got personally insulted by the train itself like a grudge.. its so weird, it feels like I missed a secret meeting where we all pretend they are awful.

Sorry if you saw this already, I had to edit something.

I know some people say the seats are less cushioned than the Mk4s for example, and wear quicker so they become less comfortable over time (the 'metal bar' issue). Not expressing an opinion for or against though, as I can't really remember what the 91 sets were like

 

[Yorkshire09876]

They don't ride as well as what they replaced, the seats are crap (and getting worse), and in some cases (GWR notably) they don't even have a buffet.

New trains ought to be better than what they replaced, and these simply aren't.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Jul 2025 ==

I know some people say the seats are less cushioned than the 91s for example, and wear quicker so they become less comfortable over time (the 'metal bar' issue). Not expressing an opinion for or against though, as I can't really remember what the 91s were like

You mean Mk4s. 91s are the locos.

But yes, the seats in the Mk4s and the HSTs on the ECML, and the HSTs on the GW, were all much better.

 

[Ashley Hill]

IETs are soulless,dull and boring. It’s funny, people hated HSTs 49 years ago and many now go gooey over them. Will this happen when IETs are replaced by the next generation?

 

[Yorkshire09876]

IETs are soulless,dull and boring. It’s funny, people hated HSTs 49 years ago and many now go gooey over them. Will this happen when IETs are replaced by the next generation?

There will be some of that, but mostly it's that people can tell whether something is an improvement or not, and these simply aren't.

The case with recent 'local' trains is in many cases very different. CAF may have their detractors, but the 195s are a massive improvement over Pacers and 150s, and the 331s are much better than the 321s.

 

[Donny Dave]

I know some people say the seats are less cushioned than the Mk4s for example, and wear quicker so they become less comfortable over time (the 'metal bar' issue). Not expressing an opinion for or against though, as I can't really remember what the 91 sets were like

As I have not yet been on a GWR or Avanti 80x yet, I can't comment on what they are like. However, I have recently done a NE 4 in 8 rover, where I was able to compare the LNER, TPE and Hull Trains 80x. From my trip report, I said the folliwing:

I've read quite a few posts on this forum about the seating quality on the Azuma's, usually saying they are poor and need replacing ASAP. However, that wasn't my experience. I found them to be acceptable on every occasion I used them, the same can be said for the Hull Trains 802s when I have used them in the past. In contrast though, the seats on the TPE 802s are dire. On the 3 occasions I used them, the seats had no padding, with the frame digging into my backside.

I don't know if there is a plan for TPE to deal with the seating problems they obviously have, but out of the 3 fleets, they are by far the worst.

Overall, in my (limited) experience of travelling on an 80x, I think they are an upgrade on HSTs an cl91+mk4s, especially in terms of acceleration, which requires me to order a very large slice of humble pie, as I was a very vocal critic during the initial consultation and design phase.

 

[godfreycomplex]

IETs are soulless,dull and boring. It’s funny, people hated HSTs 49 years ago and many now go gooey over them. Will this happen when IETs are replaced by the next generation?

Like as not. By the time the IETs have been replaced the machines will have taken over anyway. (Joke)

 

[stadler]

The class 8XX IET trains just feel a bit cheaply built and poor quality. The ride quality is not great either. I do much prefer them to some other intercity trains (for example i think the IET trains are definitely an improvement over the 390 trains) but overall they are a bit dissapointing. Not the best trains but certainly not the worst either.

 

[Harpo]

It’s funny, people hated HSTs 49 years ago and many now go gooey over them.

And depressing that half a century later ride quality is worse.

 

[class26]

Just changing the seats would go a long way to improving the 800`s.
Perhaps softer lighting also

 

[Mag_seven]

It’s funny, people hated HSTs 49 years ago and many now go gooey over them.

Id suggest that those people who "hated HSTs" were enthusiasts / traction bashers who bemoaned the loss of the loco hauled services that the HSTs replaced. For the general travelling public the HSTs were really popular.

Just changing the seats would go a long way to improving the 800`s.
Perhaps softer lighting also

Agreed.

 

[stadler]

Id suggest that those people who "hated HSTs" were enthusiasts who bemoaned the loss of the loco hauled services that the HSTs replaced. For the general travelling public the HSTs were really popular.



Agreed.

HSTs and MK3s were indeed excellent popular trains in the 70s and 80s and 90s when new but nowadays they are just old knackered outdated trains that belong on a heritage railway and not the mainline. I personally prefer the IETs to HSTs if i am given a choice. A lot of enthusiasts were unhappy with IETs replacing HSTs but i see it as an upgrade even though the 8XXs are not the best.

 

[Ashley Hill]

d suggest that those people who "hated HSTs" were enthusiasts / traction bashers who bemoaned the loss of the loco hauled services that the HSTs replaced. For the general travelling public the HSTs were really popular

That’s the people I was talking about.
There is probably a lot more on an IET to dislike than on an HST. The only real bonus on an IET is the air conditioning.

 

[Tracked]

There will be some of that, but mostly it's that people can tell whether something is an improvement or not, and these simply aren't.

The case with recent 'local' trains is in many cases very different. CAF may have their detractors, but the 195s are a massive improvement over Pacers and 150s, and the 331s are much better than the 321s.

I find 331's a step down from the 333's, quite happy that the 333's are the usual Doncaster-Leeds traction now

 

[507 001]

For me it is simply that the seats are akin to medieval torture devices, even when brand new. I haven’t been on one for a while so haven’t experienced the metal bar issue.

Sit in first, where the seating is decent and they’re perfectly nice.

 

[irish_rail]

Change the seats and you'd be left with a decent train. Internally they are a definite step up on the tomb stone era of Mk3 carriages on the Western, except for the unbelievably uncomfortable seat due to the protuding metal bar. New seats would make a train that could one day be loved I reckon.

 

[Welly]

Solve the seat issue, the ride quality issue and (in the case of GWR's 800s) the build quality issue and the 800s will be near perfect! Especially when OHL are extended on the MML and the GWML.

 

[AlterEgo]

They're ghastly trains which have aged poorly because they're cheap rubbish made by a company better known for making, uh, "personal massagers". And that's what the train does to you - they ride appallingly to the extent that keeping coffee in a cup on LNER is a challenge. They're lit up like a dental surgery, have hard seats in both classes, the GWR ones don't even have a buffet or shop. What else? Oh yes, plenty of seats at window blanks, varying floor heights between intermediate and driving trailer cars (why so low in the driving trailers?). A friend took a 225/MkIV for the first time last week and asked what the "new trains" were, and that they were lots more comfortable. Objectively they are not good trains and have aged dreadfully. Natty garbage.

 

[eisenach]

I was perfectly mobile with no issues until, on the first of April (!), my wife and I caught a GWR 80x from Newport to Paddington. The train was quite full, so seating choice was limited. I ended up sitting on a seat with completely collapsed base, with the two metal bars much in evidence. Uncomfortable.

But it wasn't until I stood up at Paddington that I realised that I could barely walk. I had sciatic pains down my left leg, and the muscles hurt. Three months and more on, and my mobility is severely restricted, leg muscles hurt, sciatica still there, and a swollen knee. No-one so far has managed to get to the bottom of what's wrong.

I'm placing my next hope in an Osteopath on Wednesday.

Not a great advert for the railway, is it ?

 

[RailWonderer]

For a 'flagship' IC train, they are not up to the task. Ride quality is meant to meet a standard so drinks don't spill and seats are meant to increase passenger comfort each generation. You'll read European rail press releases where passenger standards of comfort are always referred to, yet with this DfT specified, barebones spec built to a cost, it wasn't even a consideration. The Pendolino, for its small windows, still has a superior build and ride quality and doesn't feel older now than what it was 20 years ago. The same can be said about Voyagers despite their inefficient use of space in the coach, they are a quality train built on the continent to continental standards. The IETs rattle hideously on the GWML and the metal bar coming through the seats is an embarrassment. The ambiance is horrid as well, see DB's ICE trains and Sweden's SJ interiors, especially X40s, X55s, X2000s.

The same can be said about the Kiel seats on the 720 which have also hardened and even for short journeys they are unpleasant.

 

[sh24]

They aren't awful, but they aren't good either

Pro
* Legroom in standard is exceptionally good
* Decent windows
* Good loo provision
* Very reliable - never had one sit down on me anywhere
* reliable AC - no shonky BR era arrangement a la Class 158

Con
* None of the seats are that comfortable - posture is good but they lack softness
* Underfloor engine noise (albeit better than a Voyager) in some carriages on some routes
* Stark lighting
* The Avanti Evero version has the worst first class seat on any intercity train - no recline
* Indifferent ride quality

 

[ChilternTurbo]

I have travelled on IETs over many thousands of miles now with GWR, LNER and Avanti. I find them good trains for the job. I like the acceleration and the fact that you can go to the vestibule and not have a hurricane and diesel fumes coming in through open windows. However, I do bemoan the fact that the seating (with the exception of the Avanti seats) and lighting let things down. If the comfort and ambience could've matched the 125/225 in their 'Mallard' refurbishment guise, I suspect that there would be a lot less hate for the things. Lighting and seating are your main points of contact after all.

But it wasn't until I stood up at Paddington that I realised that I could barely walk. I had sciatic pains down my left leg, and the muscles hurt. Three months and more on, and my mobility is severely restricted, leg muscles hurt, sciatica still there, and a swollen knee. No-one so far has managed to get to the bottom of what's wrong.

You have my sympathy as someone who has suffered with sciatica. I've found that standing up and moving around very 45 minutes or so really helps, although I appreciate that is not so easy on a packed train. Interestingly, the old IC70 seat really aggravated my lower back. The IET ones I find are ok for me to maintain good posture but I haven't had the 'pleasure' of a collapsed seat base.

 

[AndrewJM70]

Personally I think they are the second nicest trains on the network (behind 397s).

The really awful trains are the XC Voyagers.

 

[HJ10001]

Recently, I went on a 807 between Runcorn and Crewe, the couldn't reach 125MPH - due to the units not being built with a tilt mechanism! The speed felt like a 110MPH 350 Desiro on the same route.

 

[jfowkes]

I feel like it's important to note that some things are not fundamental to the 80x series, like the seats - they could have specified any seat - it's not really an issue with the design of the train. Though in practice I can see that it amounts to the same thing.

But things like ride quality definitely are (to the extent that it's a train issue and not a permanent way issue).

 

[The exile]

Virtually all of my IET journeys are 15 minutes or less and for that they do a perfectly adequate job. I’ve never really noticed the aircon, so it’s obviously doing a good job. Leg room is OK but nothing special - but that’s about where it stops.
Ride is poor, seats are now wearing to the stage where even in those 15 minutes the metal bar makes its presence felt - the overall impression is “cheap and nasty”. Provision for anyone travelling with anything other than a small bag (let alone a bicycle - remember, these things are also used on local & medium distance stoppers) is inadequate, although that’s hardly unique to the IET.
I wonder whether the person responsible for the specs travels on them for long distances regularly- I suspect not.

 

[superalbs]

I'm lucky enough to have been on over 800 different types of train, and never have I encountered a train so unapologetically diabolical as the UK Class 800s. Riding on them is an assault on the senses.

Stepping on-board, you are met with lights that are just too bright, and this is even worse in hours of darkness. It is genuinely unpleasant to have such bright lighting on a train that operates on a metro service, but even worse for a train that is very often used for long-distances.

The seating is pathetic. It was rubbish from day one, unusually upright and nowhere near enough padding. Then the seat cushions promptly went on to collapse, so now you just get to sit on a metal/plastic bar, which is pathetic for a premier rail service in western Europe.

Then there's the ride quality, and oh my god is it bad! Each unit seems to vary, ranging from "bad" to "shocking". It's common to hear loud underfloor banging sounds, or harsh lateral hunting for long periods. Drinks are often spilled and objects are moved around simply by being placed on the tables.

And to add to that, the interior styling is bleak and dull, which of course does not go well with the harsh lighting. Also the interior feels cheap, which makes sense because it is, and there are often loose parts or rattles.

I hate useless rancid these things so much, they're just awful in every way. I certainly don't miss them when spending time in other countries, which I tend to do a lot these days.

 

[The exile]

But things like ride quality definitely are (to the extent that it's a train issue and not a permanent way issue).

Ride quality needs to be judged on poor track as that’s where it really matters. Pacers rode at least as well on the main line as the IETs do.

 

[superalbs]

I feel like it's important to note that some things are not fundamental to the 80x series, like the seats - they could have specified any seat - it's not really an issue with the design of the train. Though in practice I can see that it amounts to the same thing.

But things like ride quality definitely are (to the extent that it's a train issue and not a permanent way issue).

But those are the seats that are fitted, and thus is what my experience is like.

 

[charlier]

They're ghastly trains which have aged poorly because they're cheap rubbish made by a company better known for making, uh, "personal massagers". And that's what the train does to you - they ride appallingly to the extent that keeping coffee in a cup on LNER is a challenge. They're lit up like a dental surgery, have hard seats in both classes, the GWR ones don't even have a buffet or shop. What else? Oh yes, plenty of seats at window blanks, varying floor heights between intermediate and driving trailer cars (why so low in the driving trailers?). A friend took a 225/MkIV for the first time last week and asked what the "new trains" were, and that they were lots more comfortable. Objectively they are not good trains and have aged dreadfully. Natty garbage.

What do you mean lit up like a dental surgery? Can you elaborate