Worst Rolling Stock in UK

[valenta]

Thought I would begin a thread where people voiced their opinions on which rolling stock they think is the worst in the UK.

My choice has to be the 142 Pacer, the train that should really be a bus. Yet, it is run on busy commuter lines e.g. Middlesbrough to Carlisle, resulting in a lack of space both for yourself and for your belongings and to top it off you are submitted to the hurrendous incessant screeching noise throughout you're journey! Im my opinion the 142 is a totally flawed idea, that should be confined to the quietest of rural lines.

 

[Darandio]

Im my opinion the 142 is a totally flawed idea, that should be confined to the quietest of rural lines.

It's not a flawed idea when you consider how long ago they were introduced, to serve a purpose which they did reasonably well at the time.

Of course now it's a completely different story, they are primarily used on routes that were apparently "no growth" areas but have grown dramatically meaning we see the overcrowding of today. To be fair, on some diagrams in and around Middlesbrough, even the occasional appearance of a 156 doesn't suffice, nor would a 158. The only working solution would be to double up on certain diagrams, even a pair of 142's would help ease the situation at certain times of the day but that always raises the question of where to get the spare set from, there just isn't one!

It's the reality of what we have today, but what are Northern supposed to do with their hands tied?

 

[Yew]

Personally I would say a northern 144 with richmond seating, Purely becasuse if that interior was in any other train, it would be good. Im still sure there is a way to stop pacers bouncing, However I dont know how, as im sure they bounce on perfectly straight peices of track.....

 

[Darandio]

Im still sure there is a way to stop pacers bouncing, However I dont know how, as im sure they bounce on perfectly straight peices of track.....

Just add ballast weight, they are light. Bogies would help as well.

 

[All Line Rover]

It's not a flawed idea when you consider how long ago they were introduced, to serve a purpose which they did reasonably well at the time.

Not a flawed idea!?

Put a Pacer next to a Class 158 in front of the average person and ask what they'd prefer on their local branch line. I think I know the answer!

Class 158's were built just a few years after Pacer's, and yet are far, far superior.

In my opinion Class 158's are not suited to extremely long journeys (such as Liverpool to Norwich, Cardiff to Holyhead/Manchester), but they are ideal for branch lines such as Crewe to Shrewsbury, and although they wouldn't be perfect on branch lines operated by Northern, they'd still be much better than a Pacer!

 

[37372]

Merseyrail 142s. 'Nuff said.
a) Its a pacer
b) Abysmal seating
c) It tends to be this type that falls to bits the most whilst out working.

 

[ACE1888]

142's, cheap and nasty indeed...

 

[Oswyntail]

Not a flawed idea!?

Put a Pacer next to a Class 158 in front of the average person and ask what they'd prefer on their local branch line. I think I know the answer!

Class 158's were built just a few years after Pacer's, and yet are far, far superior.
....

Oh come on! Why stop at 158s? I would much rather have the comfort levels of 1st class on a 225 on my branch line - built around the same time. The Pacer concept - and execution - was what was required at the time, and probably saved a lot of the railway as we know it today. The alternative, of building more expensive Sprinter derivatives would have reduced service frequency and made closure a viable alternative on many lines. Compared with, say, the "good" buses that we get on the Ilkley-Leeds route (only a couple of years old) Pacers have superior ride and seating quality. Yes, they are getting on and need replacing. But give them the credit that is due them!

As for worst stock on today's railway - Pendolinos. So much potential, so many flaws.

 

[prod_pep]

Definitely the Class 142 and its fellow Railbuses, with the Class 150 not far behind.

EMUs are more difficult, but maybe the Class 318s for poor ride quality.

 

[mumrar]

Pacers. Shocking cheapness and rubbish. Even pants after changing the engines on some and an absolute horror to travel on. I laugh that someone can say Pendo's and acknowledge their shortcomings, and not the shortcomings and plain poor design of Pacers. The only modification of note carried out to the Pacer units was the addition of a Class 87!!

 

[Daimler]

I actually prefer the Pacers to the 150s. The latter always seem exceptionally horrid.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Class 390s. Horrid. Pacers I don't mind. 442s and 444s are the best

 

[Anon Mouse]

Pacers. Shocking cheapness and rubbish. Even pants after changing the engines on some and an absolute horror to travel on. I laugh that someone can say Pendo's and acknowledge their shortcomings, and not the shortcomings and plain poor design of Pacers. The only modification of note carried out to the Pacer units was the addition of a Class 87!!

And how many Leyland Nationals are left on the roads?

 

[TomJ93]

I actually prefer the Pacers to the 150s. The latter always seem exceptionally horrid.

I don't mind 150s, them seem pleasant enough and are comfortable, seem pretty reliable too.

Class 390s. Horrid. Pacers I don't mind. 442s and 444s are the best

Oh yes, a 125mph tilting stock that runs on a line that is equipped for 125mph tilting stock is awful. As is the increased reliability and safety if brings.

Not to mention it no longer dumps turd on the tracks when somebody use the loos!

And don't even get me started on how awful they are going to be when they are made longer and there will be more of them, yuck! The worse part is that all that extra seating will be for peasants to sit down, bring back 3rd class I say!

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Oh yes, a 125mph tilting stock that runs on a line that is equipped for 125mph tilting stock is awful. As is the increased reliability and safety if brings.

Not to mention it no longer dumps turd on the tracks when somebody use the loos!

And don't even get me started on how awful they are going to be when they are made longer and there will be more of them, yuck! The worse part is that all that extra seating will be for peasants to sit down, bring back 3rd class I say!

I find them exceptionally poorly designed, noisy (in parts) and hardly smooth at all, say, compared to an HST (or even 156 on the same route in smoothness repects), and to be fair, I would rather do any run on the WCML on a 350, sadly the timing lets them down. Just because you like them doesn't mean that anyone else who feels otherwise is wrong and I don't appreciate the sarcastic tone.

 

[MCR247]

HSTs?! Smooth?! I'd like to disagree on account of my jeans covered that were covered in orange juice after a recent trip!

 

[Anon Mouse]

HSTs?! Smooth?! I'd like to disagree on account of my jeans covered that were covered in orange juice after a recent trip!

smoother than a 225 set with the DVT leading!

 

[valenta]

HSTs?! Smooth?! I'd like to disagree on account of my jeans covered that were covered in orange juice after a recent trip!

Oh dear Usually HST's are quite smooth, with the exceptions being when they crossover tracks at high speeds, or indeed when the doors are slammed shut at stations. This is the major problem I have with HST's, the doors, the fact that they are not automatic. I enjoy original and nostalgic features on trains as much as the next man but these doors are just a bit of a hassle, both for commuters and the train guards and surely should have been left behind in the 90's. When getting of a HST you always feel rushed to have to pull down the window, twist the handle and grab your luggage! Few people shut the door when entering or leaving the trains, thus leaving the train guards to slam the every door on the train, sometimes delaying the departure time.
Is there a reason why doors on HST's have not been automated?

 

[Darandio]

Not a flawed idea!?

Put a Pacer next to a Class 158 in front of the average person and ask what they'd prefer on their local branch line. I think I know the answer!

Class 158's were built just a few years after Pacer's, and yet are far, far superior.

In my opinion Class 158's are not suited to extremely long journeys (such as Liverpool to Norwich, Cardiff to Holyhead/Manchester), but they are ideal for branch lines such as Crewe to Shrewsbury, and although they wouldn't be perfect on branch lines operated by Northern, they'd still be much better than a Pacer!

Well no, they weren't flawed at the time they were built and did the job they were intended to, couldn't you see that was the point I was making?

What has the superiority of a Class 158 got to do with anything? They were built for a completely different market area.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is there a reason why doors on HST's have not been automated?

Cost.

 

[TomJ93]

I find them exceptionally poorly designed, noisy (in parts) and hardly smooth at all, say, compared to an HST (or even 156 on the same route in smoothness repects), and to be fair, I would rather do any run on the WCML on a 350, sadly the timing lets them down. Just because you like them doesn't mean that anyone else who feels otherwise is wrong and I don't appreciate the sarcastic tone.

The design is a compromise in some places, but not poorly designed. A poor design for instance would be having commuter style doors!

I find them very smooth, especially compared to a 150 I was on yesterday where I spilt tea all down my arm

The timing lets them down? They are a (fantastic may I add) 'all stations' unit, I don't think the driver would appreciate the draught that comes in the front going at 125mph on a corridor init.

As for the sarcasm, maybe next time you can iterate why you dislike a train? Rather than just calling them awful, it makes you sound like your only true gripe is that they replaced LHCS, rather than a true problem.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The design is a compromise in some places, but not poorly designed. A poor design for instance would be having commuter style doors!

I find them very smooth, especially compared to a 150 I was on yesterday where I spilt tea all down my arm

The timing lets them down? They are a (fantastic may I add) 'all stations' unit, I don't think the driver would appreciate the draught that comes in the front going at 125mph on a corridor init.

As for the sarcasm, maybe next time you can iterate why you dislike a train? Rather than just calling them awful, it makes you sound like your only true gripe is that they replaced LHCS, rather than a true problem.

I cannot think of a worse designed train for its purpose in Britain except for the 220/221s. I would happily take a 350 from Crewe-London ahead of a Pendo, unfortunately they have no crumple zone thus can't do anything over 100, and the current Stoke and Northampton route means it would drain all my time in London. Pendos appear to have been designed withpout future loadings in mind - 4 first coaches, a stupidly big shop?

I couldn't care less what it replaced, stock etc isn't my area of interest, thus I don't care whether it had replaced LHCS or the Royal Train! Pendos, for what were paid to build them, are a massive let down, far inferior to HSTs or even 350s!

 

[umontu]

Read the title "Worst Rolling Stock in UK" and my first thought was "I wonder how long it is till someone mentions Pacers."...

Anyhoo to add a bit of varity Class 390, 221 and 222. Why the toilets have to smell still is beyond me!

 

[Minilad]

I too detest Pendilinos, horrible claustrophobic feeling when I am on one. Seats not very comfortable and not enough tables with plugs. Windows too small. 1st / Standard ratio too much in favour of 1st. Can be noisy depending where sat.
I'm sure I could think of a few more, and yes one of them probably would be the fact they replaced 87s and Mk3s.

 

[GospelOak117]

Class 378 for its Underground style seating layout. We have enough deeply uncomfortable trains like that in London where you have to break your neck to look out of the window or otherwise look at the floor, thank you. I never thought I would miss the Class 313's!!!

Some of the others mentioned here are trains I love...142s, 150's and 220's but I must admit they are certainly not trains I would want to commute on daily, having used them in the rush hour before. Give me a nicely chilled 357 with a proper seating layout anyday for that

 

[TomJ93]

I cannot think of a worse designed train for its purpose in Britain except for the 220/221s. I would happily take a 350 from Crewe-London ahead of a Pendo, unfortunately they have no crumple zone thus can't do anything over 100, and the current Stoke and Northampton route means it would drain all my time in London. Pendos appear to have been designed withpout future loadings in mind - 4 first coaches, a stupidly big shop?

I couldn't care less what it replaced, stock etc isn't my area of interest, thus I don't care whether it had replaced LHCS or the Royal Train! Pendos, for what were paid to build them, are a massive let down, far inferior to HSTs or even 350s!

Still I see no reasoning! we bought what we could afford at the time adn are now extending them to cater for demand? If only Ariva would offer to do this for the 22xs! 7 standard class cars and 4 first seems fine to me, I guess you've never travelled on the 18:46 Euston to Crewe, MK commuters with FC tickets fill it up! We almost didn't get a seat. As for the large shop, it is sure better than a trolley, and I personally find it useful.

Read the title "Worst Rolling Stock in UK" and my first thought was "I wonder how long it is till someone mentions Pacers."...

Anyhoo to add a bit of varity Class 390, 221 and 222. Why the toilets have to smell still is beyond me!

Virgin are far better for this due to a vigorous cleaning method, never had a problem with 222s thought it had been rectified on them?

May be solved during a heavy refurb I would've thought.

I too detest Pendilinos, horrible claustrophobic feeling when I am on one. Seats not very comfortable and not enough tables with plugs. Windows too small. 1st / Standard ratio too much in favour of 1st. Can be noisy depending where sat.
I'm sure I could think of a few more, and yes one of them probably would be the fact they replaced 87s and Mk3s.

I like the seats in the Pendolinos and Voyagers. 1st is heavily utilised in the peaks, and as the railways are run as a business I think they'd want to be able to cater for a large amount of 1st passengers and have the higher revenue.

I've never see a 390 rammed to the conditions i've seen a 220, where the first/standard ratio is ludicrous.

 

[Minilad]

I like the seats in the Pendolinos and Voyagers. 1st is heavily utilised in the peaks, and as the railways are run as a business I think they'd want to be able to cater for a large amount of 1st passengers and have the higher revenue.

I've never see a 390 rammed to the conditions i've seen a 220, where the first/standard ratio is ludicrous.

390 - 294 standard 145 first thats 2.02 standard seat for every first seat
220 - 174 standard 26 first thats 4.54 standard seat for every first seat

I have never been on a pendolino where first is full and standing.
So how many 390s are running round with 7 standard and 4 first then.

 

[Greenback]

Well no, they weren't flawed at the time they were built and did the job they were intended to, couldn't you see that was the point I was making?

What has the superiority of a Class 158 got to do with anything? They were built for a completely different market area.

I agree. The 158's were designed for long distance regional travel. Oacwers were designed for use on short distance routes, mainly in metropolitan areas like Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire. Theyw ere a good idea at the time, as rail passenger levels were falling and the government was not particularly fond of public transport.

I too detest Pendilinos, horrible claustrophobic feeling when I am on one. Seats not very comfortable and not enough tables with plugs. Windows too small. 1st / Standard ratio too much in favour of 1st. Can be noisy depending where sat.
I'm sure I could think of a few more, and yes one of them probably would be the fact they replaced 87s and Mk3s.

I find the Pendolino's the most unfomfortable inter city type trains. Whether that counts as the worst rolling stock though is debatable!

Class 378 for its Underground style seating layout. We have enough deeply uncomfortable trains like that in London where you have to break your neck to look out of the window or otherwise look at the floor, thank you. I never thought I would miss the Class 313's!!!

I've not travelled on the 378's yet, but I was not inf avour of their longitudinal seating when they were introduced. It seems to me to be a step backwards for Overground trains.

 

[Yew]

Definitely the Class 142 and its fellow Railbuses, with the Class 150 not far behind.

EMUs are more difficult, but maybe the Class 318s for poor ride quality.

150's just need a good refurbishment and they could be as good as anything.
Maybe more soundproofing around the engine bay too

 

[Greenback]

When my train turns up, I groan loudly if it is a 153, because they are usually cramped and overcrowded. I much prefer even a Pacer, as with two carriages I will have a chance of sitting down. But the best is a 150, two cars and comfortable seats, plus a much smoother ride!

 

[TGV]

Voyagers, Pacers, Pendolinos, 317's, 319's, 321's, 158/159's, 170's, 150's...