Currently on a Voyager, and it strikes me this is the closest I've seen to a great train since I used to commute on CIGs. Perfect window/seat alignment, a toilet at both ends, all tables, luggage space between seats. It's basically a modem mk2. Why do people dislike these? They're fantastic.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Voyagers could be the best current train
- Thread starter mmh
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
jamesst
Established Member
You're brave saying that on here, got your popcorn ready?!
Oh yes
I know many hate them, but I do like to point out that much of the hate is down to overcrowding and seat pitch. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the all-table coach on an Avanti Voyager. Perfect window alignment for all seats. Retractable tables to make it easier to get in and out. It really is the modern mk2.Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Coach D perchance? The rest isn't like that.
They would certainly be OK if downseated but would have a very low capacity.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,255
It’s actually like that as a ‘poor man’s first class’ area on west coast units only. The rest of the train, and the whole XC fleet, is nothing like that…Oh yes
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Not deriding the 158 but it is definitely NOT quieter.
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
Agree whole-heartedly.
Paul Jones 88
Member
They would be fandabidosy if they were longer, didn't smell of poo and had seats layed out like the OP describes.
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
The toilet smell discussion has always confused me. Everyone on this forum knows how much I prefer Class 390s to any other train, and yet even I am willing to admit that their vestibules often absolutely reek of sewage. Yet, this is an issue I have never really encountered on Voyagers, even as a very regular user of CrossCountry.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
There is to be fair a train fitting most of that description (though only slightly longer than a 5 car Voyager), the Class 397. No mucky diesel either.
Ride like a cart, but you can't have everything.
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 13,165
On Voyagers I have occasionally noticed a smell within the vicinity of the "full size" toilets. But... no more so than on any other type of stock, e.g. your example.
Bertie the bus
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2014
- Messages
- 3,216
There is absolutely nothing inherently wrong with the 22x series of trains. There was something very wrong about the interior Virgin chose for the CrossCountry fleet but I always found the 222s very pleasant to travel on when they were introduced on the MML. The AWC Voyager carriage with tables is also, in my opinion, acceptable but could be better.
philosopher
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Sep 2015
- Messages
- 1,513
I too have never got the unpopularity of Voyagers. They have large windows, decent lighting, comfortable seating and for a DMU they have quite a smooth ride.
I must admit I have only really used Avanti’s / Virgin West Coast Voyagers which I believe tend to be less crowded than the Crosscountry ones.
The photo at the link below, of the interior of a class 220 in Standard, only shows airline seats, some of which are adjacent to a bulkhead rather than a window. I'd hazard that this is what most people think of when they think "Voyager".
jfowkes
Established Member
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 1,268
Voyagers have possibly the second worst bike spaces on the network after the Cross Country Turbostars. Apart from that they're fine with the exception that they're too short.
However the best train on the network is the 745/755 because of the level boarding, I will not be taking questions at this time.
However the best train on the network is the 745/755 because of the level boarding, I will not be taking questions at this time.
Last edited:
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
I mean, I don’t judge a train based on its cycle provisions alone myself but I suppose different people have different priorities.
Only experience with XC, and my main problem has been too many people trying to fit in too little train.
Remembering many journeys in “mid age” Mark 2s on similar routes I would accept the comparison. Headache-inducing, unpleasant smell, “never want to travel again”…. . Wonder whether in general the fresh air supply requirements are based on average load and just can’t cope with overcrowding….
Doctor Fegg
Established Member
The airline seats are appallingly laptop-unfriendly - the flip-down table isn’t big enough to rest a laptop, especially given the angle of the seat back. Compare with the 80Xs or the GWR HSTs with their pull-out laptop extensions.
The train is unnecessarily cramped, having been built with a tilting profile which is never used on XC, and with three massive accessible toilets because Virgin/Bombardier misread the specs.
The train is unnecessarily cramped, having been built with a tilting profile which is never used on XC, and with three massive accessible toilets because Virgin/Bombardier misread the specs.
I did the switch from falling apart mk2's to brand new voyagers in the noughties. They felt decent enough, albeit the predominance of airline seats made them feel tightly packed in comparison (I've since become used to airline seating a lot more).
The seats do feel hard, and they have traditionally been too short for the journeys they serve. For me the XC Mk 3 interior is better - better designed, softer seats, more leg room, less strident ambience.
I don't get the comparison with the CIG unfortunately !
The seats do feel hard, and they have traditionally been too short for the journeys they serve. For me the XC Mk 3 interior is better - better designed, softer seats, more leg room, less strident ambience.
I don't get the comparison with the CIG unfortunately !
irish_rail
On Moderation
If not busy I agree they are ok trains. Trouble is they usually are busy. Had they all been built as 7 car trains to replace the 7 coach rakes they replaced, then their legacy would I feel be somewhat better.
The other train I used yesterday was a 158. Quieter? Not when they have broken air-conditioning and have the emergency windows open - when they do you realise they're actually not that much quieter than a 150!
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
The all-table coach (D) on Virgin/Avanti 221s was originally used flexibly for 1st class (inc at-seat dining) on peak services in/out of Euston, and standard otherwise.
I think that type of operation was abandoned at some point during the latter days of Virgin, and the coach was reconfigured as standard.
Not long for them to go in any case.
Geezertronic
Established Member
On the WCML, I prefer the 390s from a comfort point of view, and also the 390s seem to be better than the 221s and especially the 350s at suppressing the air pressure into the coaches when going through tunnels (if that is indeed the way to describe it, causes less ear pop essentially).
The XC 220/221s have not been that bad when I've used them either
The XC 220/221s have not been that bad when I've used them either
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Yes, that's correct, it originally had 2+2 at First Class spacing with First Class blue moquette and thicker cushions. The layout hasn't changed, but the cushions were swapped back to the thinner Standard ones with the Standard style alternating red/blue moquette.
It's an interesting concept of a sort of "hybrid class" or how some might have seen Standard Premium, though I doubt I'd pay extra for it. The 1 side constitutes the main extra value to me, i.e. a seat where nobody can sit next to me.
Jacob Porrett
Established Member
Prefer the Avanti Voyagers myself compared with the Cross Country Voyagers.
- Status