Oh God, yes. Those Cravens units were terrible!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Don't forget the appalling noise Pacers make as they stop. Especially on curves.
-
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!
Most hated traction
- Thread starter 222ben
- Start date
- Status
Oh God, yes. Those Cravens units were terrible!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Don't forget the appalling noise Pacers make as they stop. Especially on curves.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
theageofthetra
On Moderation
I know this is primarily a UK rolling stock thread but parts of Eastern Europe until quite recently had some truly hideous Communist era stock. They make a 142 resemble the Orient Express in comparison.
I recall one unit in Slovakia many years ago where several windows were only held in place by a bit of glue and tape. The fumes and vibration were just hideous too.
I recall one unit in Slovakia many years ago where several windows were only held in place by a bit of glue and tape. The fumes and vibration were just hideous too.
ChathillMan
Member
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2010
- Messages
- 265
Something depressing about seeing a 170 Turbostar rock up to a platform. I hate them.
southern442
Established Member
Aren't the majority of regional train services in Poland operated by 50-year-old trains that haven't seen very much attention?
randyrippley
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Feb 2016
- Messages
- 5,383
pendolinos
overpacked, too narrow, cramped, sweaty, smelly, vomit inducing tilting trash with square wheels and stinking toilets
overpacked, too narrow, cramped, sweaty, smelly, vomit inducing tilting trash with square wheels and stinking toilets
superkev
Established Member
I call them "padded-celinos as the ambience reminds me of a padded cell.
K
RichmondCommu
Established Member
I tend to avoid HST's at all costs nowadays as I find the external doors to be too much effort to open, not to mention the fact that they are slow off the mark. I much prefer Voyagers / Meridians to be honest.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
How many padded cells have you been in and how often do you find yourself in them?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
How many padded cells have you been in and how often do you find yourself in them?
Railengineer
Member
- Joined
- 19 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 114
442's
yep grim. Hardly a symbol of quality for the very busy west coast. Why did we get it so wrong.
Bring me a mk3..... or actually a mk 2 any day.
DaiGog
Member
I like trains on which I have enough legroom (and I'm average height, so don't ask for too much when I say that), I stand a good chance of being able to see out of a window unrestricted, and the seats don't give me a numb bum after a shortish while.
Therefore, a good deal of Sprinter and Pacer stock gets the thumbs down as almost all of it has been refurbished to death with more seats crammed in, or was badly designed in the first place (by this I mean the class 150/1 which has awful window alignment in its original seating pitch). 142s with original bus seats are fine by me, as long as I don't have to spend hours on one.
Mk3s have always been hit and miss for window alignment, but in the right seat, are fine from that point of view - but the FGW, XC and EC refurbishments all leave something to be desired in the comfort stakes.
As for newer stock, 350/444/450 are good commuter trains but are subject to being used in the wrong places (Crewe-London, Waterloo-Portsmouth, Edinburgh-Manchester Airport are not ideal for them) but for short hops they are more than adequate. 180s are fine, 185s are also fine but are not InterCity units by any stretch (and their seat cushions are wearing out now). Voyagers and Pendolinos can both do one.
This list is of course not exhaustive, but suffice to say there are quite a few trains which this grumpy (not so) old man finds fault with!
Therefore, a good deal of Sprinter and Pacer stock gets the thumbs down as almost all of it has been refurbished to death with more seats crammed in, or was badly designed in the first place (by this I mean the class 150/1 which has awful window alignment in its original seating pitch). 142s with original bus seats are fine by me, as long as I don't have to spend hours on one.
Mk3s have always been hit and miss for window alignment, but in the right seat, are fine from that point of view - but the FGW, XC and EC refurbishments all leave something to be desired in the comfort stakes.
As for newer stock, 350/444/450 are good commuter trains but are subject to being used in the wrong places (Crewe-London, Waterloo-Portsmouth, Edinburgh-Manchester Airport are not ideal for them) but for short hops they are more than adequate. 180s are fine, 185s are also fine but are not InterCity units by any stretch (and their seat cushions are wearing out now). Voyagers and Pendolinos can both do one.
This list is of course not exhaustive, but suffice to say there are quite a few trains which this grumpy (not so) old man finds fault with!
Minilad
Established Member
Sounds like Tyseley had a hand in that
SpacePhoenix
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 5,491
With the 450s on Waterloo-Portsmouth I believe it's down to the number of seats that the DfT demand on that route, meaning that 3+2 seating is required to comply with that demand
47403
Established Member
In no particular order, 142's, Voyagers and Peaks, hate all 3 with a passion
Last edited:
Of the trains I've travelled on, I think 153s are my least favourite.
The leg room is so poor on them. I'm taller than average (6'2") and my knee caps end up pushed into the seat in front. The trains themselves are often in the extremes of either being draughty or (like the one I had today) trying to roast you alive. They occasionally cover for a 150 if one is unavailable on GWR west services which leads to overcrowding. They also feel like they have sluggish acceleration. On the plus side, they are appreciated for strengthening to services with capacity issues.
I'm also not a fan of Voyagers for long distance services. I find the seats very uncomfortable and crammed.
Bus seat 142s aren't a joy to travel on, but I have had no issues with other 142s or 143s, apart from a GWR pacer I had a few weeks ago that had a very leaky ceiling and windows.
In terms of other units mentioned here - I quite like the 313s, though that might be for novelty value. They have very poor seat - window alignment though. I don't mind 150s (even the 3+2 seat ones) though some are in need of attention. I am indifferent to 442s.
The leg room is so poor on them. I'm taller than average (6'2") and my knee caps end up pushed into the seat in front. The trains themselves are often in the extremes of either being draughty or (like the one I had today) trying to roast you alive. They occasionally cover for a 150 if one is unavailable on GWR west services which leads to overcrowding. They also feel like they have sluggish acceleration. On the plus side, they are appreciated for strengthening to services with capacity issues.
I'm also not a fan of Voyagers for long distance services. I find the seats very uncomfortable and crammed.
Bus seat 142s aren't a joy to travel on, but I have had no issues with other 142s or 143s, apart from a GWR pacer I had a few weeks ago that had a very leaky ceiling and windows.
In terms of other units mentioned here - I quite like the 313s, though that might be for novelty value. They have very poor seat - window alignment though. I don't mind 150s (even the 3+2 seat ones) though some are in need of attention. I am indifferent to 442s.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I find bus-seated Pacers the best 3+2 going (if there is such thing as best 3+2), because at quiet times it's actually a very nice 2+1.
142s without a doubt. 144s aren't particularly nice either. I also find 150s rather rancid.
Voyagers? There's worse out there, it's the overcrowding that's the main problem and if they sorted the toilet smell would be better than some of the other stock we have.
Voyagers? There's worse out there, it's the overcrowding that's the main problem and if they sorted the toilet smell would be better than some of the other stock we have.
randyrippley
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Feb 2016
- Messages
- 5,383
as DMUs went, the Swindon Cross Country units were quite good. 2+2 seating, decent ride, and when new some even had a mini-buffet
Quite powerful as well - when new, on the route to Weymouth on summer weekends they dometimes towed one or two old non-compartment coaches as extra trailers
Sounds like I missed out on that part of them. The Swindon 123 class was popular apparently and had a similar noise from a youtube clip I once saw but I never travelled on one. If I had earplugs when I was younger maybe I would have felt differently
Spamcan81
Established Member
OK, I'll bite. And what purpose would have been served by plinthing her?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Not a lover of any dmu below a 158 to be honest. There were some pretty crap first generation units too. Not keen on anything where I end up travelling in airline style seating either.
darylyates17
Member
For me its The Pacers and Voyagers that I hate most without doubt i am also not keen on the Pendos as they feel cramped due to the small windows and seat layout. I also feel that some of the Sprinters aren't that great either even though I have a soft spot for them due to going on them alot out of Liverpool Lime Street.
GrimsbyPacer
Established Member
Pacers and 153's are not bad as they are a bit less cramped (excluding passengers).
I hate
170s and similar Turbos.
Meridians. My Mum wants me to add she hates 153s.
I hate
170s and similar Turbos.
Meridians. My Mum wants me to add she hates 153s.
Kite159
Veteran Member
To whoever mentioned 376s, I agree.
Boiling hot in the summer (as those windows do nothing), very basic inside with horrible seats.
Should put pans on to turn them into AC services and send up north, to bring the 319s back
Boiling hot in the summer (as those windows do nothing), very basic inside with horrible seats.
Should put pans on to turn them into AC services and send up north, to bring the 319s back
Islineclear3_1
Established Member
To whoever mentioned 376s, I agree.
Boiling hot in the summer (as those windows do nothing), very basic inside with horrible seats.
Should put pans on to turn them into AC services and send up north, to bring the 319s back
It was me...
Horrible ironing board seats and the "lean to's" by the doors are the wrong height for me
Use the vehicles to augment the 378's to 6-car....(gets coat...)
urpert
Member
It was me...
Horrible ironing board seats and the "lean to's" by the doors are the wrong height for me
Use the vehicles to augment the 378's to 6-car....(gets coat...)
It's so very obvious that the 376s were an experiment which led to the more polished (if deeply uncomfortable) 378. I still tend to be pleased when one turns up on the Hayes line though as the legroom and shoulder room is so much better than a Networker.
- Status