Differences Between Various Sprinters Acceleration

[anamyd]

My experience in Devon is they seem to perform better than sprinters on local stopping services. I believe standard sprinter timings are used for local diagrams, as either class can turn up on any particular trains and sometimes they work in mixed formations. The pacers when working alone generally arrive early at each station. According to wikipedia class 143 cars weigh 24t for the DMS, and 24.5t for the DMSL, each equipped with a 230 hp (170 kW) Cummins engine. That's a much better power to weight ratio than other contemporary units.

The Cummins engines and Voith transmissions were fitted to the network 142s/143s/144s (and 141-113) in the early to mid 90s to cost effectively replace the unreliable original Leyland engines and SCG gearboxes; the improved performance is a side effect

 

[HLE]

As llama said upthread there's more variation within the classes, in the case of the 153's this is perfectly true even if there's only one subclass. Some units pick up speed reasonably well, others need full power before they will move off. It's the same with the brake releases.

More of a maintenance issue I think.

 

[edwin_m]

only having 4 wheels per vehicle improves traction?!

Shouldn't make much difference to traction but fewer wheels means less weight.

 

[Jozhua]

144 - 115 secs
142 - 115 secs
143 - 117 secs

Thanks a lot!

Nice to know there's something a Pacer is relatively good at. Maybe other train manufacturers can consider adopting weight saving techniques...I propose strapping second hand caravans to the top of trolley wheels in tow behind an old Audi Quattro

only having 4 wheels per vehicle improves traction?!

To be honest, I was thinking about top speed when I wrote that...I have no idea what it's effect on 0-60 times would be!

 

[hexagon789]

Thanks a lot!

Nice to know there's something a Pacer is relatively good at. Maybe other train manufacturers can consider adopting weight saving techniques...I propose strapping second hand caravans to the top of trolley wheels in tow behind an old Audi Quattro

To be honest, I was thinking about top speed when I wrote that...I have no idea what it's effect on 0-60 times would be!

Purely because they are so light compared to other DMUs. Imagine if you strapped a QSK19 off a Voyager to one!

In the wet? Definitely a downside. Oh and stopping is fun in a Pacer on the autumn

 

[anamyd]

Purely because they are so light compared to other DMUs. Imagine if you strapped a QSK19 off a Voyager to one!

In the wet? Definitely a downside. Oh and stopping is fun in a Pacer on the autumn

Apparently one Pacer was once fitted with 14 litre engines (Perkins 2006-TWHs) - that must have been quick, or at least "interesting"

 

[hexagon789]

Apparently one Pacer was once fitted with 14 litre engines (Perkins 2006-TWHs) - that must have been quick, or at least "interesting"

Is that the 350hp one fitted to some 158s?

 

[anamyd]

Is that the 350hp one fitted to some 158s?

yes, the engines of 158-815 to 158-862, and all 165s and 166s. I doubt they were in 350hp tunes on the Pacer though the original 11L Leylands were 205hp, and the replacement 10L Cummins are 230hp

 

[hexagon789]

yes, the engines of 158-815 to 158-862, and all 165s and 166s. I doubt they were in 350hp tunes on the Pacer though the original 11L Leylands were 205hp, and the replacement 10L Cummins are 230hp

Still, a Super Pacer...

That must've shifted some!

 

[anamyd]

Still, a Super Pacer...

That must've shifted some!

yeah I'm really curious about that one haha. I think it was in the early 90s when they were experimenting with different engines to replace the Leylands. The Voith hydraulic transmissions had already started to be fitted by then so no doubt coupled to those.

 

[anamyd]

Sprinters, people! Apparently the absolute top speed of the 150s (above their claimed maximum) has decreased with age, even though the engines are overhauled every few years. If this is true (and I'm guessing it varies between individual units) it take it that this has also affected acceleration...? Maybe this has happened to other members of the Sprinter family as well...?

 

[hexagon789]

yeah I'm really curious about that one haha. I think it was in the early 90s when they were experimenting with different engines to replace the Leylands. The Voith hydraulic transmissions had already started to be fitted by then so no doubt coupled to those.

The prototype 154 must've been fairly quick with more powerful engines than a standard 150.

Sprinters, people! Apparently the absolute top speed of the 150s (above their claimed maximum) has decreased with age, even though the engines are overhauled every few years. If this is true (and I'm guessing it varies between individual units) it take it that this has also affected acceleration...? Maybe this has happened to other members of the Sprinter family as well...?

I've never felt any if ScotRail's 156s struggle to get up speed.

 

[Llama]

Sprinters, people! Apparently the absolute top speed of the 150s (above their claimed maximum) has decreased with age, even though the engines are overhauled every few years. If this is true (and I'm guessing it varies between individual units) it take it that this has also affected acceleration...? Maybe this has happened to other members of the Sprinter family as well...?

They are likely to be about the same as they always have been, all of the driveline including the engines and transmissions and many other components will get replaced in response to either failure or length of service, this is normal. I have never had a Sprinter fresh from having an engine or transmission swap and noticed any real difference in performance.

 

[MarkyT]

Shouldn't make much difference to traction but fewer wheels means less weight.

Higher axle load on a 143 at about 12t compared to a 150 at about 9t, so higher adhesion on a smaller number (but equal proportion) of driven axles. I THINK that should be slightly better for wheelslip on greasy rails. Fewer wheels per tonne probably means worse braking though.

 

[Llama]

Pacers are generally slightly quicker off the mark than Sprinters are as you would expect from a higher power to weight ratio. But once wind resistance becomes a significant factor at say 50mph+, a single two car pacer struggles.

 

[Grannyjoans]

Pacer and 150/156 performance is very similar.

Pacer and Sprinter performance running in multi in 4/6/8 car formations is very similar.

319's slow to get going then once they reach above 30mph they are quite good

153's are the slowest

 

[hexagon789]

319's are very similar from 0 to 30mph as the above then nearly twice as fast between 30mph and 60mph.

I imagine all of 319, 321 and 322 are similar if not identical acceleration-wise.

 

[Grannyjoans]

The latest I've heard, is the 3-car version of Northern's Class 331's can do 0-60mph in 30 seconds, making them a lot quicker than 323's (51 seconds) and 22X (58 seconds) and 185's (68 seconds).

Of cause, no EMU can compare with a Class 90 running light engine.
I saw one come to a standstill at Warrington Bank Quay. It then shot off and was doing 75mph before it hit the end of the platform!
It must have done 0-75mph in about 6 seconds.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

I don't agree with those 0-60 figures. A 220 can do 0-60 in around 40 seconds and I have worked 185s out accelerating voyagers out of York!

 

[Kneedown]

Of cause, no EMU can compare with a Class 90 running light engine.

I very much doubt any EMU can compare with any loco running light engine!

 

[Grannyjoans]

Apart from a Class 20 or 31 maybe ?

 

[hexagon789]

The latest I've heard, is the 3-car version of Northern's Class 331's can do 0-60mph in 30 seconds, making them a lot quicker than 323's (51 seconds) and 22X (58 seconds) and 185's (68 seconds).

So far the fastest to 60 seems to be a 345 at 36 seconds, so 30 seconds would make Northern's new EMUs the fastest by a fair bit.

Apart from a Class 20 or 31 maybe ?

Would've thought something with a lot of power to its weight would be fastest accelerating light loco like a Deltic (3,300hp to 99 tonnes of loco).

 

[43096]

Would've thought something with a lot of power to its weight would be fastest accelerating light loco like a Deltic (3,300hp to 99 tonnes of loco).

Pah! Class 92 would blow it away: 6,760hp for 126 tonnes AND lower geared for 140km/h which means better acceleration.

 

[ed1971]

Apparently one Pacer was once fitted with 14 litre engines (Perkins 2006-TWHs) - that must have been quick, or at least "interesting"

That was 142084 back in 1991. I have no idea when it lost them in favour of Cummins LT10Rs. (BTW, I am pretty sure that Perkins 2006-TWHs are 12.7 litres rather than 14). I did travel on it once between Leeds and Wakefield Kirkgate. It didn't seem any faster than the usual Cummins LT10R. Maybe it was derated?
All Class 142s, 143s and 144s had been fitted with Voith gearboxes by late March 1991. Cummins engines started to be fitted to them in the spring of 1993 and completed in April 1996. They also got new doors during this period.

 

[Grannyjoans]

I don't agree with those 0-60 figures. A 220 can do 0-60 in around 40 seconds and I have worked 185s out accelerating voyagers out of York

I don't know whether to believe them as they're only what I saw posted on this same thread earlier!

But I do believe the Class 331 figure as it came from someone who has driven them on test

 

[Grannyjoans]

Pah! Class 92 would blow it away: 6,760hp for 126 tonnes AND lower geared for 140km/h which means better acceleration.

The fastest accelerating train is probably between class 88, 90 or 92. Out of those I've only seen a 90 to power off from a standstill and it was fast. 0-60mph in about 4 seconds ?

 

[hexagon789]

Pah! Class 92 would blow it away: 6,760hp for 126 tonnes AND lower geared for 140km/h which means better acceleration.

If we include electrific then definitely! My comment was referring to among diesels.

 

[sw1ller]

Sprinter acceleration differences, people!

Does anyone know if TfW 158-834 (the Voith DIWARail unit) has different acceleration to other 158s...? I was on it recently but couldn't tell a difference, so it would be a subtle difference we'd be talking about.

It’s a slower train.

Leaving wellington towards Telford, I have the same acceleration and braking points when rail head conditions are good. At my braking point at Telford I can be doing 62-69mph depending on the unit (158’s) but with 834 I’m only doing 55mph. I’ve checked a fair few points all over and it’s slower everywhere. It’s good up to 26mph then it dies a death. You know when it’s doing 26mph because you’ll feel it change gear. It also pulls away differently than all the others. Usually I’d pull away on notch 3 or 4 and once moving go into 7 slowly. But with 834, I pull away in notch 7 as it does it’s own thing and doesn’t rev up until it’s got going.

Every time you move the power handle to a different notch it’ll jerk so it’s the smoothest way to pull away from a station with it.

 

[anamyd]

It’s a slower train.

Leaving wellington towards Telford, I have the same acceleration and braking points when rail head conditions are good. At my braking point at Telford I can be doing 62-69mph depending on the unit (158’s) but with 834 I’m only doing 55mph. I’ve checked a fair few points all over and it’s slower everywhere. It’s good up to 26mph then it dies a death. You know when it’s doing 26mph because you’ll feel it change gear. It also pulls away differently than all the others. Usually I’d pull away on notch 3 or 4 and once moving go into 7 slowly. But with 834, I pull away in notch 7 as it does it’s own thing and doesn’t rev up until it’s got going.

Every time you move the power handle to a different notch it’ll jerk so it’s the smoothest way to pull away from a station with it.

many thanks for that info from that perspective

 

[43096]

If we include electrific then definitely! My comment was referring to among diesels.

Class 68 would surely better a Deltic: 3,750hp for 85 tonnes.