Fainsa Sophia seating problems

[Fokx]

Moderator note: Posts #1 - #3 originally in this thread:

TPE Mark 5A coaching stock progress

An image of the first Mark 5A bodyshell to be completed for Transpennine Express have been released by CAF. Given the porthole window where the gangway connection would usually be, I wonder whether it's an end vehicle. RTM have fluffed the report a bit by claiming that the mark 5 carriages will...

www.railforums.co.uk

I'm expecting two things:
1. A seat where the user can't feel the frame through it;
2. Seats at least vaguely aligned to the windows

A number of new designs have achieved this, so anything else is an excuse.

1. It’s not the seat frame you can feel on the mk5a’s it’s the actual sponge that’s been designed to be much more rougher and hard wearing to prevent sagging seats. I believe the foam material used meets much greater fire protection standards than the class 185 as well. The class 175 are really bad for feeling the seat frame. Personally I quite like harder seats, and I’m probably of the minority that actually liked the Urban 90 bus seat too

2. Is far enough regarding the mk5a’s, the 397’s are much better in this regard but at the end of the day the idea was to reduce overcrowding and maximise seating numbers. Personally I’d rather a seat next to a wall than to be stood up, but I agree it’s not ideal

 

[Bletchleyite]

1. It’s not the seat frame you can feel on the mk5a’s it’s the actual sponge that’s been designed to be much more rougher and hard wearing to prevent sagging seats.

Nope, definitely the frame.

I believe the foam material used meets much greater fire protection standards than the class 185 as well. The class 175 are really bad for feeling the seat frame. Personally I quite like harder seats, and I’m probably of the minority that actually liked the Urban 90 bus seat too

I like hard seats too (e.g. the "ironing board") - just not the Sophia. The cause of the problem, if you look at the frame from underneath, appears to be that the cushion is deeper at the back than the front with a pronounced ridge - and if you're heavy you push it down and feel that.

 

[Ianigsy]

the cushion is deeper at the back than the front with a pronounced ridge

I believe the technical term (according to the Simpsons at least) is "ass groove".

 

[superalbs]

Nope, definitely the frame.

The cause of the problem, if you look at the frame from underneath, appears to be that the cushion is deeper at the back than the front with a pronounced ridge - and if you're heavy you push it down and feel that.

Correct, see my image:

 

[py_megapixel]

I'm still in two minds about the Sophias.
They are pretty hard and uncomfortable to sit on - however, the Sophias are lovely and wide and there's tons of legroom.

Unlike a few others on this forum, I didn't particularly like the high-backed Grammers on the IC125s, though I loved the lower-backed ones on Desiros (E3000s).

Never had the problem of feeling the seat back myself on a Sophias.

My preferred seat would be something with a similar shape and size to a Sophia, but which feels like an E3000 to sit on, if you see what I mean.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So, an E3000 then! I don't think they are any narrower than the Sophia, they may look a bit narrower as the back is slightly higher.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Another problem I'm having with Fainsa Sophias is finding a reputable source backing up my feelings that they are too hard and uncomfortable for use on long-distance services. I had somebody reverse my Wikipedia edit because "Tripadvisor reviews are not a reliable source" (I didn't write said Tripadvisor review, I just thought it might be a useful peice of evidence to show that the Fainsa Sophias are an unpopular seat).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Another problem I'm having with Fainsa Sophias is finding a reputable source backing up my feelings that they are too hard and uncomfortable for use on long-distance services. I had somebody reverse my Wikipedia edit because "Tripadvisor reviews are not a reliable source" (I didn't write said Tripadvisor review, I just thought it might be a useful peice of evidence to show that the Fainsa Sophias are an unpopular seat).

"Too hard" is a matter of opinion. I, possibly because my backside is, er, well padded, quite like hard seats, particularly ironing boards which aren't quite as good as a Grammer product but are up there. However, the issue with the Sophia to me isn't that it's hard, but the shape of the base cushion as pictured above. This issue probably only affects people who are heavy enough to compress the base cushion enough to feel that shape on the back of their upper thigh, which can be quite uncomfortable.

 

[DB]

I'm still in two minds about the Sophias.
They are pretty hard and uncomfortable to sit on - however, the Sophias are lovely and wide and there's tons of legroom.

Legroom is determined by the spacing, not by the seats themselves specifically - although thick and backward-sloping seats can make it harder to space them out sufficiently.

 

[py_megapixel]

Legroom is determined by the spacing, not by the seats themselves specifically - although thick and backward-sloping seats can make it harder to space them out sufficiently.

Indeed - what I meant was that I like the thin, relatively straight seat backs which allow proper spacing without compromising capacity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Legroom is determined by the spacing, not by the seats themselves specifically - although thick and backward-sloping seats can make it harder to space them out sufficiently.

The Class 158 is a good example. With the original seats, steeply raked and thick backed, legroom is unpleasantly tight. Replace with Grammer IC3000 (upright but thick backed) and you get a bit more space. Replace with ironing boards and spacing is really generous. All without changing the layout.

Of course there is the option of a thick base and thin back. Only the Grammer E3000 (Desiro seat) seems to deliver that. I did have high hopes for the very similar looking Fainsa Sophia...until I sat in one!

 

[DB]

The Class 158 is a good example. With the original seats, steeply raked and thick backed, legroom is unpleasantly tight. Replace with Grammer IC3000 (upright but thick backed) and you get a bit more space. Replace with ironing boards and spacing is really generous. All without changing the layout.

Indeed - I was actually thinking of them when I wrote that!

Also the Richmond seats fitted to 144s and 153s - these are the worst examples I can think of for lack of legroom.

 

[Rhydgaled]

The Class 158 is a good example. With the original seats, steeply raked and thick backed, legroom is unpleasantly tight. Replace with Grammer IC3000 (upright but thick backed) and you get a bit more space. Replace with ironing boards and spacing is really generous. All without changing the layout.

Correction: Replace with ironing boards and the legroom is generous; the spacing (seat-pitch) stays the same. Personally I would like to see soft seats like the original 158 ones but with a more-generous spacing to improve legroom (can't do that on a 158 of course without ruining window alignment, but on stock with bigger windows it would be possible).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Correction: Replace with ironing boards and the legroom is generous; the spacing (seat-pitch) stays the same. Personally I would like to see soft seats like the original 158 ones but with a more-generous spacing to improve legroom (can't do that on a 158 of course without ruining window alignment, but on stock with bigger windows it would be possible).

On the 158 I'd put a lot of importance on keeping the original layout as it is fully window aligned. On stock that doesn't have a Standard layout based window spacing, such as say Voyagers, I'd agree with you.

 

[Rhydgaled]

On the 158 I'd put a lot of importance on keeping the original layout as it is fully window aligned.

Which is why I had the bit in brackets. The rest of that sentence (ie. the 'Personally I would like to see soft seats like the original 158 ones but with a more-generous spacing to improve legroom' bit) was what I would like to see on a new train, or one where the window size and arrangement allows it.

 

[supervc-10]

The 158s as refurbished by EMT (and I think some Welsh units?) with Grammer seats are great IMO. Very comfortable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The 158s as refurbished by EMT (and I think some Welsh units?) with Grammer seats are great IMO. Very comfortable.

3 TOCs fitted the excellent IC3000 seat - ScotRail, ATW (now TfW) and EMT (now EMR). I find the Welsh ones best as they used the variant with the smaller headrest so it's less claustrophobic.

 

[DB]

3 TOCs fitted the excellent IC3000 seat - ScotRail, ATW (now TfW) and EMT (now EMR). I find the Welsh ones best as they used the variant with the smaller headrest so it's less claustrophobic.

And they were also used in FGW (now GWR and Scotrail) HSTs, and ATW Mk3 loco-hauled sets.

Think they were also used as the first class seats (in 2+2 formation) on the 458s.

Don't recall seeing them on any other trains in this country.