S Stock feels dated despite age

[Thirteen]

The S Stock hasn't even had a midlife refurb yet which could extend their life a bit further.

2009 stock I wouldn't surprised if they replace it a tad earlier than 2049.

 

[Silent]

The S Stock hasn't even had a midlife refurb yet which could extend their life a bit further.

2009 stock I wouldn't surprised if they replace it a tad earlier than 2049.

Using 09 stock for daily commute they are also actually in good condition, reliable. I think before I used them daily they appeared dirty with worn out seats. But I think the poor ventilation system is the main thing that would age it. Only because it would give the trains a bad perception when all other tube stock have air cooling. Not really how it operates.

 

[Wolfie]

Using 09 stock for daily commute they are also actually in good condition, reliable. I think before I used them daily they appeared dirty with worn out seats. But I think the poor ventilation system is the main thing that would age it. Only because it would give the trains a bad perception when all other tube stock have air cooling. Not really how it operates.

My personal irritant on the 09s is the seat arm rests. They appear almost optimised to go into trouser pockets as you sit down and then rip the damned trousers! I can think of no other stock that has the same type of armrests.

 

[Silent]

My personal irritant on the 09s is the seat arm rests. They appear almost optimised to go into trouser pockets as you sit down and then rip the damned trousers! I can think of no other stock that has the same type of armrests.

I rarely sit down, the armrests also look extra worn out because they use lightly coloured fabric on the armrests? S stock has a dark area where the arms rests although uncomfortable, more than other stock as they are overly thin.

 

[TRAX]

Maybe 2040

That’s too early, I’d say 2050-2055 at the earliest for the earlier S8s.

 

[thomalex]

I rarely sit down, the armrests also look extra worn out because they use lightly coloured fabric on the armrests? S stock has a dark area where the arms rests although uncomfortable, more than other stock as they are overly thin.

Never understood why they went for fabric on the armrests as enivatably they get worn and it's generally just an odd thing to do. Should have some hard wearing plastic on these.

 

[Silent]

A link where the writer theorises when some stock would need to be replaced, doesn't exactly match the topic but matches some current posts I think.

A 21st Century Underground Rolling Stock Update

Something we have been wanting to do for some years is an overall look at the update plans for London Underground rolling stock (aka trains) and, independently, line resignalling.

www.londonreconnections.com

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Nov 2025 ==


It's pretty interesting that the central line was meant to be futuristic and forward thinking when it came out but is so dated reading the link.

Never understood why they went for fabric on the armrests as enivatably they get worn and it's generally just an odd thing to do. Should have some hard wearing plastic on these.

Year I agree I wonder why they thought that was a good idea.

The interior of the vic line is also a bit brave I think as I notice all other moden tube stock, accept for s stock, as it has floating seats usually have grey panels below the seats, probably to hide dirt. The 09 stock has black panels to do the same but what is brave, and maybe makes the train look more modern than the 90's stocks is the use of white under the seats by the door entrances.

 

[OneTrackMinded]

It's pretty interesting that the central line was meant to be futuristic and forward thinking when it came out but is so dated reading the link.

It was meant to be futuristic, but the final product wasn’t. Look at the 3 coloured mockups, they all look forward thinking, but it was decided in the end, as is often the case, to scale back and go with smothering more traditional. Also applies to other parts of the train like the traction motors being a strange DC solid state system, which was a compromise they made instead of going with AC motors.

I believe the New Tube for London is the only time in a long time (probably since the 1932 stock?) that LU has actually decided to rebuild the design from the ground up. Everything else is just an initiation over previous designs, evolution rather than revolution.

 

[manwe3]

Interesting to see the difference in opinion. I take almost the exact opposite view, aged very well imo, and still looks very modern to my eyes.

Their introduction was a huge leap forward, more so than the 73 stock to the 24 stock on the Piccadilly. Glad they don't have the uncomfortable bright white LEDs too.
But yes some of the worn out seats need to be replaced as would be expected for their age (big fan of the moquette though I must say)

 

[OneTrackMinded]

and still looks very modern to my eyes.

They look like a 1980s design, not 1990s. Very odd headlight cluster at the front and strange black panels with a tiny destination screen at the front. From an engineering and technical standpoint, they’re a mess too.

It was all done on the cheap by a failing manufacturer that went out of business a few years later.

The 1995/1996 stock looks a lot more modern in comparison.

more so than the 73 stock to the 24 stock on the Piccadilly.

Air conditioning and walk-through carriages is the biggest innovation in deep-level tube design in almost a century, amongst other things.

The changes between the 1962 stock and the 1992 stock don’t even compare slightly.

 

[Silent]

Interesting to see the difference in opinion. I take almost the exact opposite view, aged very well imo, and still looks very modern to my eyes.

Their introduction was a huge leap forward, more so than the 73 stock to the 24 stock on the Piccadilly. Glad they don't have the uncomfortable bright white LEDs too.
But yes some of the worn out seats need to be replaced as would be expected for their age (big fan of the moquette though I must say)

Aesthetically if you are speaking of the 1992 stock I definitely agree. I think in operational senses and technology the 24 stock is a big leap. But aesthetically the 1992 stock was a bigger leap and actually still looks modern externally at the side. I think the 24 stock looks more traditional because of the thinner door frame and maybe a return to showing a few more panels or bolts not too appear seamless on the train, if that makes sense, but still looks very modern and futuristic at the front.

 

[boiledbeans2]

[...] Also applies to other parts of the train like the traction motors being a strange DC solid state system, which was a compromise they made instead of going with AC motors. [...]

That was the technology at that time though. Other UK examples include the Class 319 and 456. See my post here for some international examples:

1992 stock Refurbishment?

It looks like they're going for a darker moquette judging from the Twitter pic but could be wrong. It appears to be a car without any seats in it.

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Silent]

That was the technology at that time though. Other UK examples include the Class 319 and 456. See my post here for some international examples:

1992 stock Refurbishment?

It looks like they're going for a darker moquette judging from the Twitter pic but could be wrong. It appears to be a car without any seats in it.

www.railforums.co.uk

And class 319 looked and sounded older than 92 stock because the dc motor sounded like a dc motor, no high pitched noises and the bodyshell looked more like trains before it.

 

[AM9]

And class 319 looked and sounded older than 92 stock because the dc motor sounded like a dc motor, no high pitched noises and the bodyshell looked more like trains before

The 319 looked like trains before ti (e.g. 150, 317, etc.,) because like those earlier classes, they were built on the MK111 platform. They looked different from the nlater class 320/321/322 because they had to have emergency egress through a front door. It would have been a waste of design effort and manufacturing budget just to make them more pleasing to a few eyes, (with no commercial benefit in doing so).

 

[Silent]

The 319 looked like trains before ti (e.g. 150, 317, etc.,) because like those earlier classes, they were built on the MK111 platform. They looked different from the nlater class 320/321/322 because they had to have emergency egress through a front door. It would have been a waste of design effort and manufacturing budget just to make them more pleasing to a few eyes, (with no commercial benefit in doing so).

That makes sense, like a family of trains. Even then class 321 looks older than 92 stock to me. I would say the networker design looks the same age as 92 stock and looks much newer than former designs.

 

[boiledbeans2]

And class 319 looked and sounded older than 92 stock because the dc motor sounded like a dc motor, no high pitched noises and the bodyshell looked more like trains before it.

The 319 does have the high pitch whine, on top of the DC motor sound. You will need to sit right over the motor bogies to hear it. It sounds different to e.g. Class 317 or Class 455 with original motors.

 

[35B]

They look like a 1980s design, not 1990s. Very odd headlight cluster at the front and strange black panels with a tiny destination screen at the front. From an engineering and technical standpoint, they’re a mess too.

It was all done on the cheap by a failing manufacturer that went out of business a few years later.

The 1995/1996 stock looks a lot more modern in comparison.

Air conditioning and walk-through carriages is the biggest innovation in deep-level tube design in almost a century, amongst other things.

The changes between the 1962 stock and the 1992 stock don’t even compare slightly.

I disagree. The change between the steam era 1962 stock and the 1992 stock was, to a passenger, from night to day, visually, aurally, in how they rode. They marked a step change in Tube design, continued with the 1995, 1996 and 2009 designs.

The 2024 is then another step change forward, comparable to that between 1962 and 1992 stock.

 

[NCT]

The S stock is almost perfect. A 15-year-old train with original trimmings will look tired, but that's not the same as being dated. I much prefer the S stock's warm tone to the dentist surgery bright white lights of some of the later trains - goes for both the lighting and the panel colours. The only thing that looks a bit 'retro' is the light diffusers - nothing that can't be changed in a mid-life refurb.

 

[xtmw]

and strange black panels with a tiny destination screen at the front.

Which has been replaced with CLIP with much more readable text and a red panel. Also includes new keypad(s) for the automatic announcer and further details on PEA activation in the event of multiple handles down

 

[Russel]

2009 stock I wouldn't surprised if they replace it a tad earlier than 2049.

Why?

 

[A60stock]

I disagree. The change between the steam era 1962 stock and the 1992 stock was, to a passenger, from night to day, visually, aurally, in how they rode. They marked a step change in Tube design, continued with the 1995, 1996 and 2009 designs.

The 2024 is then another step change forward, comparable to that between 1962 and 1992 stock.

I think it's the fact that the 1973 stock had such a good refurbishment that the step change between that and what will be the 24 stock, is somewhat understated aesthetically - and at the end of the day, this is probably the main thing that is noticed by the customer. The interiors of the 73 stock are still comparable to modern stock (can you imagine if they were running around in the original state and we were comparing with the 24 stock?!).
The exterior is essentially the SAME livery as the 24 stock. I would also say that aesthetically, asides from the new type of interior PIS destination screens (which themselves aren't exactly revolutionary compared to DMIs), there probably isn't too much. The biggest changes are the fact the trains are walkthrough and have air-conditioning (and you cannot see air conditioning). Below the solebar/electronically however, it's like comparing a spaceship to horse and cart. The step change from 73 to 24 is definitely bigger but a little less noticeable - although it is still NOTICEABLE!

The step change from 62 to 92 by contrast was aesthetically (as mentioned by others) huge, but technologically not as advanced. However, I can imagine that the step change felt "bigger" due to the fact that the 92 stock marked a massive design change for the first time, including a new livery, externally hung doors for the first time and a performance package, these are all features which are far more comparable to modern stock. This is despite the fact they did not even add DMIs to the interiors! I am however, too young to remember the 92 stock as new so cannot speak from experience..................but then again, I also can't do it for the 73 vs 24 stock either yet...........

At the end of the day, it's a 30 year step change vs 50.

 

[35B]

I think it's the fact that the 1973 stock had such a good refurbishment that the step change between that and what will be the 24 stock, is somewhat understated aesthetically - and at the end of the day, this is probably the main thing that is noticed by the customer. The interiors of the 73 stock are still comparable to modern stock (can you imagine if they were running around in the original state and we were comparing with the 24 stock?!).
The exterior is essentially the SAME livery as the 24 stock. I would also say that aesthetically, asides from the new type of interior PIS destination screens (which themselves aren't exactly revolutionary compared to DMIs), there probably isn't too much. The biggest changes are the fact the trains are walkthrough and have air-conditioning (and you cannot see air conditioning). Below the solebar/electronically however, it's like comparing a spaceship to horse and cart. The step change from 73 to 24 is definitely bigger but a little less noticeable - although it is still NOTICEABLE!

The step change from 62 to 92 by contrast was aesthetically (as mentioned by others) huge, but technologically not as advanced. However, I can imagine that the step change felt "bigger" due to the fact that the 92 stock marked a massive design change for the first time, including a new livery, externally hung doors for the first time and a performance package, these are all features which are far more comparable to modern stock. This is despite the fact they did not even add DMIs to the interiors!

At the end of the day, it's a 30 year step change vs 50.

That's fair. But, remembering the 1992 stock arriving and fitting into a largely "pre-refurbishment" Underground, I think the fact that 1973 stock has been refurbished does reduce the sense of difference. As a punter, the key difference I'll notice on the 2024 stock will be the internal environment. In just the same way, my memory of the transition of SR Mk1 EMUs to Electrostars and Desiros was about the clean interior and lack of fogged up windows.

The engineering differences are important, and I realise that the 1992 stock was a transitional step as technologies evolved. But even acknowledging that, the difference in just how freely they feel like they run against their predecessors was night and day - something I also heard commented on as their replacement of the Bulleid era stock on the W&C.

 

[bramling]

That's fair. But, remembering the 1992 stock arriving and fitting into a largely "pre-refurbishment" Underground, I think the fact that 1973 stock has been refurbished does reduce the sense of difference. As a punter, the key difference I'll notice on the 2024 stock will be the internal environment. In just the same way, my memory of the transition of SR Mk1 EMUs to Electrostars and Desiros was about the clean interior and lack of fogged up windows.

The engineering differences are important, and I realise that the 1992 stock was a transitional step as technologies evolved. But even acknowledging that, the difference in just how freely they feel like they run against their predecessors was night and day - something I also heard commented on as their replacement of the Bulleid era stock on the W&C.

From the point of view of the passenger, I don’t really see the 24 stock as that much of a transformation. Walk-through isn’t that much of a benefit for most (in fact if anything it’s often a disbenefit in terms of comfort), so it’s only really air conditioning, which is only an issue in high summer. The trade-off for that is a restricted window setup, which may well make the trains feel somewhat claustrophobic.

 

[A60stock]

That's fair. But, remembering the 1992 stock arriving and fitting into a largely "pre-refurbishment" Underground, I think the fact that 1973 stock has been refurbished does reduce the sense of difference. As a punter, the key difference I'll notice on the 2024 stock will be the internal environment. In just the same way, my memory of the transition of SR Mk1 EMUs to Electrostars and Desiros was about the clean interior and lack of fogged up windows.

The engineering differences are important, and I realise that the 1992 stock was a transitional step as technologies evolved. But even acknowledging that, the difference in just how freely they feel like they run against their predecessors was night and day - something I also heard commented on as their replacement of the Bulleid era stock on the W&C.

I agree, I think the 1962 to 1992 stock transition probably felt bigger, given the state of every other stock at the time. As I was saying, I think technologically, the 24 stock is one of the biggest transformations, perhaps up there with the S stock vs A Stock, but the 1992 stock probably wins it on general perception of the scale of change.

Interesting point re the SR MK1 slam door stock transition to Electrostars and Desiros. That must be up there with one of the biggest step ups in history (or at least in the last 50 years). I would say that was more transformational than the replacement of the mk3 based 80s EMUs with Aventras.

 

[35B]

I agree, I think the 1962 to 1992 stock transition probably felt bigger, given the state of every other stock at the time. As I was saying, I think technologically, the 24 stock is one of the biggest transformations, perhaps up there with the S stock vs A Stock, but the 1992 stock probably wins it on general perception of the scale of change.

Interesting point re the SR MK1 slam door stock transition to Electrostars and Desiros. That must be up there with one of the biggest step ups in history (or at least in the last 50 years). I would say that was more transformational than the replacement of the mk3 based 80s EMUs with Aventras.

Absolutely - the step change on the Southern inner suburbans was the replacement of SUBs with 455s and EPBs with Networkers. As a passenger, 455 to Arterio(sclerosis) is minor by comparison.

 

[NCT]

Was there a step change felt between the 1967 and 2009 stocks?

 

[35B]

Was there a step change felt between the 1967 and 2009 stocks?

I didn't feel it - more a progression.

 

[Silent]

I agree, I think the 1962 to 1992 stock transition probably felt bigger, given the state of every other stock at the time. As I was saying, I think technologically, the 24 stock is one of the biggest transformations, perhaps up there with the S stock vs A Stock, but the 1992 stock probably wins it on general perception of the scale of change.

Interesting point re the SR MK1 slam door stock transition to Electrostars and Desiros. That must be up there with one of the biggest step ups in history (or at least in the last 50 years). I would say that was more transformational than the replacement of the mk3 based 80s EMUs with Aventras.

In fact I actually feel like aventras feel more like the 80s emu than electrostars as I think electrostars were designed to feel more comfortable, the suburban/commuter versions, although I don’t use them much, but Aventras have more of a practical commuter feel like the 80s emu’s had, to me at least. It’s like electrostars are an evolution of networkers and aventras are also an evolution of electrostars but kind of going back to being more practical than comfortable???

 

[Thirteen]

When the 1972 stock is replaced, I think the Bakerloo Line customers won't believe their eyes.

 

[Wolfie]

When the 1972 stock is replaced, I think the Bakerloo Line customers won't believe their eyes.

When was the last time the Bakerloo line actually got new stock as opposed to castoffs from other lines? 1938 stock?