Why does the class 323's look exactly look like the class 166's

[TSWFan2020]

I don't know why but the both trains look the same and I don't know the reason why I keep seeing the trains at Manchester Piccadilly. Can anybody explain to me please?

 

[Scotrail314209]

I don't know why but the both trains look the same and I don't know the reason why I keep seeing the trains at Manchester Piccadilly. Can anybody explain to me please?

The ones you see at Manchester Piccadilly are operated by Northern and run local services around that area including out to Liverpool, Crewe and Stoke-on-Trent. That'll be why you always see them.

 

[JonathanH]

I don't know why but the both trains look the same and I don't know the reason why I keep seeing the trains at Manchester Piccadilly. Can anybody explain to me please?

They really don't look alike. The 323s look much narrower. A passing resemblance between Turbos, Networkers and 323s but not much more.

 

[TSWFan2020]

but how? here is an image of them both

 

[Bletchleyite]

I guess that was the sort of style BR was specifying at the time, it looks very 1990s. Different manufacturer, though, so they aren't the *same*.

 

[TSWFan2020]

The ones you see at Manchester Piccadilly are operated by Northern and run local services around that area including out to Liverpool, Crewe and Stoke-on-Trent. That'll be why you always see them.

ohhhhhhh. no wonder then. thanks for that

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jan 2022 ==

I guess that was the sort of style BR was specifying at the time, it looks very 1990s. Different manufacturer, though, so they aren't the *same*.

you were right. the class 323's are form the 90's

 

[Domh245]

The 165/6 (and 465/6 for that matter) have always struck me as much 'rounder' than the 323s - there is a vague similarity between the two in that they have the traditional light clusters in the bottom-middle corners and full width windows, but that's about it for the similarities. Side-on, the 323s are flatter, don't have as prominent a black bar underneath the windows (possibly the case that the window is higher on the 323), and completely lack any steps/anti-climb covers around solebar level

 

[Towers]

Just for completeness, here's an electric unit that really does look the same as a Class 166! First image is a class 466, second is 165 (not my photos).

Diesel classes 165 & 166, and electric classes 365, 465 & 466 were all from the same 'family' of train, and really are/were very similar indeed!

 

[fgwrich]

Just for completeness, here's an electric unit that really does look the same as a Class 166! First image is a class 466, second is 165 (not my photos).

Diesel classes 165 & 166, and electric classes 365, 465 & 466 were all from the same 'family' of train, and really are/were very similar indeed!

How bizarre, I knew the 465s came out this way on test from Strawberry Hill (and when NSE were considering putting them on our lines as well) but I've never seen a 466 here!

 

[Towers]

How bizarre, I knew the 465s came out this way on test from Strawberry Hill (and when NSE were considering putting them on our lines as well) but I've never seen a 466 here!

Me neither, only noticed the location when I attached the pic and it was in the file name! The faces of a platform full of 1990's Basingstoke commuters would have been a sight to behold if that rolled in on a Waterloo stopper!

 

[1955LR]

I am advised by stylists and designers that ones perception of "difference" often varies by culture , western culture often just looks at overall shape of two items but eastern, more at the minutia of the detail. Having said that , as an engineer I tend toward the minutia , often I say things are look different, but others will say they look similar or the same . Its all on the eye of the beholder.

 

[D6975]

Just for completeness, here's an electric unit that really does look the same as a Class 166! First image is a class 466, second is 165 (not my photos).

Diesel classes 165 & 166, and electric classes 365, 465 & 466 were all from the same 'family' of train, and really are/were very similar indeed!

Don't forget the 325s as well, head on near identical to the aforementioned.

 

[northernbelle]

I don't know why but the both trains look the same and I don't know the reason why I keep seeing the trains at Manchester Piccadilly. Can anybody explain to me please?

I know exactly what you mean. This sort of thing fascinates me - the psychology of how something looks and how people interpret it.

I've attached a rough sketch of what I think are the common features of several types at the time which gives them a family resemblance:

• Bodyshell shape - tapering out towards a wide point halfway up
• Windscreen curved at the top but flat at the bottom, with a deeper section at the bottom
• Pantograph windscreen wipers
• Recessed BMAC lighting - the outer side shaped to follow the curve of the bodyshell, the inner side completely verticle
• Coupling recess in the centre with radius corners

Arguably all these design traits give a family resemblance to classes 165, 166, 168/0, 323, 325, 365, 465 and 466.
The proposed Class 157 DMU would also have had a similar appearance as would the proposed Crossrail Class 341 EMU.

 

[Towers]

Don't forget the 325s as well, head on near identical to the aforementioned.

Ah, yes!

 

[bramling]

I guess that was the sort of style BR was specifying at the time, it looks very 1990s. Different manufacturer, though, so they aren't the *same*.

The similarity between 323 and 165/166/465/466/365 has always intrigued me. I seem to remember this came up in here before, and the general consensus was it’s largely a coincidence.

I wonder if Regional Railways simply took the Turbo/Networker specifications, modified them for their needs, and hence ended up with something fairly outwardly similar.

One way or other, the 323 ended up being a pretty decent train.

 

[tomuk]

The similarity between 323 and 165/166/465/466/365 has always intrigued me. I seem to remember this came up in here before, and the general consensus was it’s largely a coincidence.

I wonder if Regional Railways simply took the Turbo/Networker specifications, modified them for their needs, and hence ended up with something fairly outwardly similar.

One way or other, the 323 ended up being a pretty decent train.

The 323s were built by half a dozen blokes who walked out from / were made redundant by Metro Cammell (GEC-Alsthom) maybe they photocopied the Networker designs before they left.

 

[D365]

Don't forget the 325s as well, head on near identical to the aforementioned.

The 325s are a modified Class 319 design with a Networker cab bolted onto the front.

 

[Mikey C]

The similarity between 323 and 165/166/465/466/365 has always intrigued me. I seem to remember this came up in here before, and the general consensus was it’s largely a coincidence.

I wonder if Regional Railways simply took the Turbo/Networker specifications, modified them for their needs, and hence ended up with something fairly outwardly similar.

One way or other, the 323 ended up being a pretty decent train.

To a layman, the 323s and the Networkers/Network Turbos DO look alike. Which makes sense as they are from a similar generation of train, and perform a similar role.

Similarly, many modern gangwayed stocks look pretty similar too, e.g. the 196s, the 350/450, the 458 (with their revised gangways), the WM 172s etc. Of course there are difference, but a non enthusiast probably wouldn't see them.

In the same way, the Airbus 330 and 350, and the Boeing 787 and 777 airliners are all different looking, but similar enough to be easily confused.