Most Disappointing Rolling Stock.

[AM9]

For GN users this wasn’t an issue before Thameslink.

Are you implying that the existence of Thameslink or the design of its trains are causes of vandalism?

 

[Bevan Price]

185s - nice trains, but too small - should have all been 5 coaches.

390s - Great for performance, but abysmal internal layout - claustrophobic and poor seat v window alignment. Also too much space wasted on 1st Class.
Greatly prefer the 8xx types, although 5 coaches are inadequate for some services. ,

 

[thejuggler]

195s are terrible. The suspension and bogey noises are awful if you sit in the wrong place and the gearbox hunts on some stretches. Thankfully my use of them is on short trips, but Leeds to Chester isn't a trip I'd want to do. I was happy to be on a 175 for an hour the other day. So comfortable.

By comparison the electric 331 version is better, as long as you don't sit in the pantograph unit and have the neutral section 'bang' which is very loud, sounding like a car spring under extreme tension snapping.

 

[bramling]

Are you implying that the existence of Thameslink or the design of its trains are causes of vandalism?

Let’s go with both. The austere nature of the toilets probably doesn’t help. They present a very hostile ambience, about on a par with the inside of a lift in a semi-derelict 1970s London tower block.

 

[Tetragon213]

Class 80x are, in my experience, horrendous. I went into it thinking people were moaning just because they killed HSTs, and were looking for any reason to trash-talk them.

I did a short jaunt from Cardiff to Bristol, and oh dear lord did I discover the "hard" way that it wasn't hyperbole.

The seats are less comfortable than church pews, the bouncing was worse than the Class 150 Sprinter I'd used to get to Treforest earlier in the day, the noise was horrid, and I'm convinced the person who designed the toilet has never actually used one before.

Oh, and it's always really comforting when the door starts unlocking itself and moving while the platform is still 200m away. I found that one out the hard way while leaning on the door and suddenly felt the blasted thing move.

At least the Class 805/7 variants have fixed the worst of the interior design issues.

 

[Trainz6013]

Personally I'm not the biggest fan of the 555s. I find their acceleration and braking to be very rapid on the several I have ridden, I get that means they are faster between stations but I do feel that they throw you about a bit when stopping or starting!

I also don't think much of the seating layout, having the seats sideways along the sides of each coach, I much prefer the mostly forward/backwards facing seats on the Metrocars, and on that subject I also liked the front seats on the Metrocars, with them allowing you to see where you are going! I wonder though if nowerdays that is against some health & safety regulations or something, so I won't knock the 555s for not having that

Overall, I think the acceleration/braking of the 555s is much too harsh, and I don't think much of the seating layout

 

[tfw756rider]

I also don't think much of the (555s') seating layout, having the seats sideways along the sides of each coach

longitudinal seating

I much prefer the mostly forward/backwards facing seats on the Metrocars

transverse seating

 

[VT 390]

185s - nice trains, but too small - should have all been 5 coaches.

390s - Great for performance, but abysmal internal layout - claustrophobic and poor seat v window alignment. Also too much space wasted on 1st Class.

The amount of first class has reduced significantly in recent years, I agree the 3 1/2 carriages Virgin used to operate was to much most of the time but with Avant its only 1 1/2 carriages on weekdays and just the half carriage K on weekends which is often very busy.

 

[FrontSideBus]

I asked one of the drivers about reducing first class even more but he reckoned they won't because first is what is keeping the service profitable!

 

[Goldfish62]

The amount of first class has reduced significantly in recent years, I agree the 3 1/2 carriages Virgin used to operate was to much most of the time but with Avant its only 1 1/2 carriages on weekdays and just the half carriage K on weekends which is often very busy.

And on two journeys I did recently I upgraded to Premium Standard, paying a total of £70. The PS coach on both journeys was full. Imagine all the revenue forgone if that was a standard class coach rather than a coach that can be used for 1st Class or Premium Standard as demand dictates.

 

[AM9]

Let’s go with both. The austere nature of the toilets probably doesn’t help. They present a very hostile ambience, about on a par with the inside of a lift in a semi-derelict 1970s London tower block.

Not in my experience. They are certainly not gin palaces, but functional mass carriers that have so far been fairly reliable, (excepting one notorious software issue). I've yet to witness one being so crowded that passengers couldn't board, which includes 8-car Cambridge & Peterborough trains at STP.
As for toilets, they don't seem to be any worse than similarly loaded trains elsewhere. The UK does have a general vandalism problem though, almost everywhere.

 

[yorksrob]

Not in my experience. They are certainly not gin palaces, but functional mass carriers that have so far been fairly reliable, (excepting one notorious software issue). I've yet to witness one being so crowded that passengers couldn't board, which includes 8-car Cambridge & Peterborough trains at STP.

In the spirit of my original post, in terms of the new Thameslink trains, the disappointing ones are those that turn up on Brighton runs without tables or power sockets.

One would reasonably expect that such services should have these things, when some of the trains already do.

Agree that they're good at soaking up the crowds

 

[Goldfish62]

I asked one of the drivers about reducing first class even more but he reckoned they won't because first is what is keeping the service profitable!

Yes, as long as people are prepared to pay for 1st Class in sufficient numbers it makes absolutely no sense reducing it. Unless of course you're a class warrior who conflates the British social class system with rail travel.

 

[physics34]

Virtually every item of rolling stock built from about 1965 to about 2015 has one thing in common - good ride quality*, some better, some worse, they may have had terrible cramped interiors and seating, class 150s being a good example. While newer trains may have nicer interiors, more legroom, and better acceleration, many just don't ride nicely - I'm referring mainly to CAF products of which the 397 has a pleasant interior but when running 100 mph plus its like riding on a go cart and quite tiring on a 200 mile run.

I mean surely ride quality should have improved over 50 years of innovation and development.

*(Pacers excluded)

Its seems all innovation up to around 2010 has been ignored at the dft just went with 'off the shelf' products being designed and built without proper thought.
Ride quality of mk3 derived stock is pretty good. That 'design' should still be being built now.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's a trade off. Lighter bogies mean less damage to track and lower energy costs. However they also mean a poorer ride. Generally it's the very heavy units that ride best - Classes 221 and 185 in particular - but these have those downsides. The 158 is an odd exception, riding very well despite not being very heavy.

 

[Goldfish62]

It's a trade off. Lighter bogies mean less damage to track and lower energy costs. However they also mean a poorer ride. Generally it's the very heavy units that ride best - Classes 221 and 185 in particular - but these have those downsides. The 158 is an odd exception, riding very well despite not being very heavy.

The 158 came from a different era, when BR was striving to achieve the best possible ride quality (and seat comfort!). The lightweight Networkers are fitted with the BR Series 3 bogie which gives an excellent ride at low and medium speeds.

 

[Mikey C]

It's a trade off. Lighter bogies mean less damage to track and lower energy costs. However they also mean a poorer ride. Generally it's the very heavy units that ride best - Classes 221 and 185 in particular - but these have those downsides. The 158 is an odd exception, riding very well despite not being very heavy.

But it shouldn't be at the cost of a horribly uncomfortable ride though. And the ride on the CAF stock isn't acceptable, it's not just slightly less comfortable than older stock, it's way more uncomfortable.

I was reminded of this on a Chiltern Mk5 the other day, with the constant jiggling and noise. On track which gives a nice smooth ride on the 168s. And I've had the same on 397s on the WCML, or 331s going to Blackpool North.

Aventras or Desiro Cities maybe ride slightly worse than their Electrostar and Desiro UK predecessors, but they're still fine.

 

[FrontSideBus]

There was a few bits on the Cambrian line where even the 158's got a bit jiggly... will be fun when 197's are running it!

 

[Goldfish62]

There was a few bits on the Cambrian line where even the 158's got a bit jiggly... will be fun when 197's are running it!

The Cumbrian coast line is bad enough in places on a 195!

 

[matchmaker]

To be fair, not much can match a 158/159 for ride quality. I'm very fond of them.

I would agree, but have add that a 170 can also be very comfortable. I was very impressed last year on a journey between Aberdeen to Stirling on a 170, particularly going down Strathearn when the unit we were on was sitting happily at 90/100mph with even the engine noise not too obtrusive.

 

[Goldfish62]

I would agree, but have add that a 170 can also be very comfortable. I was very impressed last year on a journey between Aberdeen to Stirling on a 170, particularly going down Strathearn when the unit we were on was sitting happily at 90/100mph with even the engine noise not too obtrusive.

Yes, they were also designed in the era when passenger comfort still mattered!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, they were also designed in the era when passenger comfort still mattered!

I don't think, unless you're about 4 foot 6, the original Midland Mainline ones could be thrown that allegation!

 

[Goldfish62]

I don't think, unless you're about 4 foot 6, the original Midland Mainline ones could be thrown that allegation!

I travelled on one only one, but can't remember much about it other than thinking that it was somewhat inappropriate for an Intercity service!

The 158s with the original seating of course have the legroom issue.

 

[yorksrob]

I was on an Azuma on Sunday. The vibration was quite something, however being in an uncrowded carriage made for a good journey.

 

[AilsaBus]

Class 334s have to be the worst trains in Scotland. God awful screeching from the suspension/bogies and they also seem to leak like a seive.

 

[D1511]

A few from me ....

Firstly, there are the Mk5 sleepers, worse than the MK4 sleepers before them, which in turn were much worse than the Mk3s they replaced. Shouldn't so-called luxury trains be getting more comfortable instead of less so? So this is progress huh?

Obviously.....80x are dreadful for reasons already outlined, and on my regular journeys on the WCML, I actively seek out pendolino operated services purely for comfort, often sacrificing journey time in the process. First class seating and layout is not comparable to its predecessors and I'd far rather sit in a much more comfortable coach for longer.

If I can't get an Avanti service from MKC to pick up a Pendo home, I'll use the fast LNR Euston-Crewes instead, and I'm not that impressed with the 730s. Generally, at least 2 sets of doors won't be working, and the seats aren't very comfy. I'm quite pleased when an old pair of 350s turns up instead, and I'll take the comfier seat and smoother ride in exchange for the train being a bit busier with 2 fewer carriages. The 730s do have better overhead luggage space however......but I'd rank that as considerably less important than a comfy seat and shoogly ride quality.

One other thing .......I had the joy of a XC 220 journey on Monday thanks to the AWC blockade this week - my first trip in a Voyager series unit for ages, and I have to say I was pleasantly surprised with the experience. I upgraded to first on seatfrog for a very reasonable £34 (Edinburgh - Tamworth - cheaper than the equivalent AWC SP upgrade to Stafford) and it was very smooth and comfortable, apart from a bit of engine rev related vibration through the floor, that made my feet feel strangely itchy! Only complaint was the slightly baggy seat upholstery, which meant my bum slid back and forward about an inch on the seat! But comfort-wise, I think they've lasted well. They're emissions nightmares and bloody noisy on the outside, but I was surprised at the quality of my journey. Plenty of luggage space and roomy (I realise this isn't the case with the tilting ones) and a nice staggered 2-1 seating arrangement. No doubt they'll be replaced with something worse in due course, as appears to be the trend.

 

[Goldfish62]

A few from me ....

Firstly, there are the Mk5 sleepers, worse than the MK4 sleepers before them, which in turn were much worse than the Mk3s they replaced. Shouldn't so-called luxury trains be getting more comfortable instead of less so? So this is progress huh?

Obviously.....80x are dreadful for reasons already outlined, and on my regular journeys on the WCML, I actively seek out pendolino operated services purely for comfort, often sacrificing journey time in the process. First class seating and layout is not comparable to its predecessors and I'd far rather sit in a much more comfortable coach for longer.

If I can't get an Avanti service from MKC to pick up a Pendo home, I'll use the fast LNR Euston-Crewes instead, and I'm not that impressed with the 730s. Generally, at least 2 sets of doors won't be working, and the seats aren't very comfy. I'm quite pleased when an old pair of 350s turns up instead, and I'll take the comfier seat and smoother ride in exchange for the train being a bit busier with 2 fewer carriages. The 730s do have better overhead luggage space however......but I'd rank that as considerably less important than a comfy seat and shoogly ride quality.

One other thing .......I had the joy of a XC 220 journey on Monday thanks to the AWC blockade this week - my first trip in a Voyager series unit for ages, and I have to say I was pleasantly surprised with the experience. I upgraded to first on seatfrog for a very reasonable £34 (Edinburgh - Tamworth - cheaper than the equivalent AWC SP upgrade to Stafford) and it was very smooth and comfortable, apart from a bit of engine rev related vibration through the floor, that made my feet feel strangely itchy! Only complaint was the slightly baggy seat upholstery, which meant my bum slid back and forward about an inch on the seat! But comfort-wise, I think they've lasted well. They're emissions nightmares and bloody noisy on the outside, but I was surprised at the quality of my journey. Plenty of luggage space and roomy (I realise this isn't the case with the tilting ones) and a nice staggered 2-1 seating arrangement. No doubt they'll be replaced with something worse in due course, as appears to be the trend.

There are no Mark 4 sleepers. The only Mark 4s built were for the Intercity 225 sets.

I agree about the unrefurbished Voyager 1st Class seats - same comfy seats as on Pendolinos. Therefore you won't be pleased to know that the refurbished Voyager are receiving the same 1st Class seats as in the Evero 805 and 807s!

 

[D1511]

There are no Mark 4 sleepers. The only Mark 4s built were for the Intercity 225 sets.

I agree about the unrefurbished Voyager 1st Class seats - same comfy seats as on Pendolinos. Therefore you won't be pleased to know that the refurbished Voyager are receiving the same 1st Class seats as in the Evero 805 and 807s!

Ah, so it is a Mk3 sleeper, a refurbished Mk3 sleeper and a Mk5 sleeper I've been in then. I just assumed the middle one was a Mk4 as the internal layout was different to the original Mk3, so thank you for the correction.

That is rather unwelcome news about the seat refurbishment......I think I can live with baggy upholstery rather than have a metal bar across my a*se.

 

[Hadders]

In the spirit of my original post, in terms of the new Thameslink trains, the disappointing ones are those that turn up on Brighton runs without tables or power sockets.

One would reasonably expect that such services should have these things, when some of the trains already do.

Agree that they're good at soaking up the crowds

No Thameslink branded trains (i.e. the class 700s) have power sockets in standard class. I agree that seat back tables really should be fitted to the full fleet.

They are brilliant at moving people though.

 

[6Gman]

Perhaps a controversial one, and by no means the most disappointing rolling stock going, but I find the Avanti Evero fleet really quite underwhelming, especially when compared to the existing Pendolinos.

Whilst it's no doubt they're the better of the bad bunch that is IETs, I just can't warm to them. It's not something I can put my finger on but they just feel a lot cheaper, blander and poorer quality than the excellent Pendolinos.

That's not to say they are inherently awful trains (as there's far worse out there), but when you look at the Pendolinos which they run on routes alongside, I just feel they could've been a lot better.

Personally I prefer the Everos - especially the 807s.

Better seat layouts, better views and a spacious feel in Standard.