Firesprite
Member
The VOE Pullman the only way to travel between Waterloo and Bournemouth, had a wonderfully trip to Bournemouth a few years ago.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!
What's the most comfortable train for long journeys?
- Thread starter JACK SPILLMAN
- 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
FGW First class seats are nice, the Night Riviera std class are pretty much the same seat as well.
Chiltern Silver sets are very nice to travel in, some customers think that they're in 1st when they're in std.
444s aren't too bad and 377s in the 2+2 sections are good too.
378s are undoubtedly the worst, but then you're not meant to be on there for long are you, and it's odds on you'll be standing anyway if you're travelling anywhere near peak times.
Chiltern Silver sets are very nice to travel in, some customers think that they're in 1st when they're in std.
444s aren't too bad and 377s in the 2+2 sections are good too.
378s are undoubtedly the worst, but then you're not meant to be on there for long are you, and it's odds on you'll be standing anyway if you're travelling anywhere near peak times.
Kite159
Veteran Member
Drsatan
Established Member
In the UK: probably an East Coast HST or Mk4 set. Any 158 with its original seating is also perfectly acceptable for long distance journeys.
Overseas: either an ICE1 (I haven't travelled on an ICE2,3 or TD so can't comment), or a refurbished SBB BpM RIC (EW IV).
Overseas: either an ICE1 (I haven't travelled on an ICE2,3 or TD so can't comment), or a refurbished SBB BpM RIC (EW IV).
Strathclyder
Established Member
Metro/Light Rail: Glasgow Subway 1980 stock
Commuting: SR Class 334
Long distance: GNER Mk4 (I know, it's been a while since I've traveled on the ECML!)
Commuting: SR Class 334
Long distance: GNER Mk4 (I know, it's been a while since I've traveled on the ECML!)
Last edited:
scotsman
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 3,252
Hmm...East Coast First Class, Pendolino First Class, Scotrail Cl170, Class 185
HarleyDavidson
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Aug 2014
- Messages
- 2,529
The best train the one I drive, I drive it all over the place. It's a road train (car), it runs at high speed when I want, goes exactly to the location I want and I don't have to put up with screaming babies, rampant kids, ignorant mobile phone users and it runs non stop to Taunton or Minehead, Exeter or wherever.
Guaranteed to get a comfy seat with a view!
Guaranteed to get a comfy seat with a view!
higthomas
Member
- Joined
- 27 Nov 2012
- Messages
- 1,132
and you cannot get up and walk around, let alone read or go to the toilet whilst in motion, and personally I find that the view out of the drivers seat is quite ugly, largely because motorways are hideous, but also because you can't actually look out of the window for long lest you crash.
LUKAnorthwest
Member
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2012
- Messages
- 38
I'm well aware of the dislike of Pendolino's on this forum so I am immediately hiding behind an armour plate before the barrage arrives!
As purely a comfort view I find the Pendolino seats very comfortable for a journey of 2 hours plus. Everyone must have a numb bum at the end of a journey that long but at least I don't start wriggling in the seat to get comfy mid way through the journey.
As for an overall experience I would still pick a 390 any day as I enjoy the feel and the impression of speed. The smoothness of the ride and the overall atmosphere. Fair enough we all like big windows but c'mon, there not that bad. I feel the sacrifice of a big window for safety is reasonable and adds to the assurance that your in safe hands. I'm citing this directly from the incident at Grayrigg where over 90% of the windows were intact and 100% of the ones that were designed to stay in one piece did their job perfectly thus avoiding more fatalities/serious injury. also the thickness of the pillars are there to give added strength and ensure that the train stays together and doesn't crush on impact. The question is this, would 31 people of died if the Ladbroke Grove rail disaster involved a Pendolino? I think not.
Sorry sounds like I'm ranting...
On another idea. Wouldn't it be a good idea to install Siemens desiro seats in class 15X excluding 158? I think that would increase some capacity as the seats I see currently are a bit thick IMO
As purely a comfort view I find the Pendolino seats very comfortable for a journey of 2 hours plus. Everyone must have a numb bum at the end of a journey that long but at least I don't start wriggling in the seat to get comfy mid way through the journey.
As for an overall experience I would still pick a 390 any day as I enjoy the feel and the impression of speed. The smoothness of the ride and the overall atmosphere. Fair enough we all like big windows but c'mon, there not that bad. I feel the sacrifice of a big window for safety is reasonable and adds to the assurance that your in safe hands. I'm citing this directly from the incident at Grayrigg where over 90% of the windows were intact and 100% of the ones that were designed to stay in one piece did their job perfectly thus avoiding more fatalities/serious injury. also the thickness of the pillars are there to give added strength and ensure that the train stays together and doesn't crush on impact. The question is this, would 31 people of died if the Ladbroke Grove rail disaster involved a Pendolino? I think not.
Sorry sounds like I'm ranting...
On another idea. Wouldn't it be a good idea to install Siemens desiro seats in class 15X excluding 158? I think that would increase some capacity as the seats I see currently are a bit thick IMO
tsr
Established Member
Goodness me, no! I find them really claustrophobic, for some reason, although I would agree the seats aren't bad. My feelings are probably not helped by the significant lack of usable doors.
In airline-style seating, very few trains seem to have adequate legroom. The class 175s are the exception, but are let down by the rock-hard seats (the seats are even a fairly good shape, but boy do they need some padding). There are some nice soft seats arround too, on (some?) South West Trains class 158/159 units, but sadly the legroom that goes with them is horribly inadequate. What a shame nobodys managed to combine the great interior layout (legroom, and largely good views out the windows) of the 175s with some softer seats.
Always cool inside, but that's not always nice. Been chilled to an uncomfortable degree on those more than once. Great to cool down on a very hot sunny day though.
Have the seats changed when the power doors were fitted? I only used them once, before the power doors, and thought the seats were hard. Much better than the view of a window-pillar I had on the train I then changed onto though.
Can't speak for 1st class, or 4-CIGs, but when I went to Lymington to ride a 3-CIG (got the 'Freshwater' unit) I was very supprised by the wonderfully soft seats.
That was only a phase 2 (1970) example. The phase 1 (1964) sets were even plusher !
al.currie93
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 381
Mark 3 is most preferable, closely followed by a Mark 4 (only second because of the lack of opening windows in the vestibule, but are probably nicer for the longest routes), itself closely followed by the Mark 2F (which recently just overtook the Class 180 because of it's lack of under-floor engines). Generally I believe that anything over 100 miles should be locomotive hauled.
Really dislike Class 390s; they're the only train I will actively avoid, as I feel very cramped in them, they seem airless to me, I find the tilt very odd, and all of those make me feel a bit sick. Voyagers I prefer because they don't tilt and have larger windows, but suffer the same problems other than that (and smell bad). 222s I don't mind and would come behind 180s.
444s and 442s are nice for journeys up to 100 miles, as are 158s, 159s and 185s. 450s and 350s I count as suburban units, not intercity or regional!
If I could reallocate long distance rolling stock (assuming unlimited numbers of WHAT IS CURRENTLY USED) it would be:
- Mk 4s hauled by 91s or 67s on all intercity express routes greater than 250 miles. (125mph)
- Mk 3s hauled by 43s (HST) or 90s on all intercity express routes between 100 and 250 miles. (110mph)
- 442/444/159 on intercity express routes up to 100 miles. (90mph)
- Mark 2s hauled by 37s (or 68s, depending on how they go!) on regional routes greater than 75 miles. (90mph)
- 158/156/175 on regional routes up to 75 miles (75mph).
- Nothing with 1/3rd and 2/3rd doors on any of these!
This is just considering what is currently on the railway!
Really dislike Class 390s; they're the only train I will actively avoid, as I feel very cramped in them, they seem airless to me, I find the tilt very odd, and all of those make me feel a bit sick. Voyagers I prefer because they don't tilt and have larger windows, but suffer the same problems other than that (and smell bad). 222s I don't mind and would come behind 180s.
444s and 442s are nice for journeys up to 100 miles, as are 158s, 159s and 185s. 450s and 350s I count as suburban units, not intercity or regional!
If I could reallocate long distance rolling stock (assuming unlimited numbers of WHAT IS CURRENTLY USED) it would be:
- Mk 4s hauled by 91s or 67s on all intercity express routes greater than 250 miles. (125mph)
- Mk 3s hauled by 43s (HST) or 90s on all intercity express routes between 100 and 250 miles. (110mph)
- 442/444/159 on intercity express routes up to 100 miles. (90mph)
- Mark 2s hauled by 37s (or 68s, depending on how they go!) on regional routes greater than 75 miles. (90mph)
- 158/156/175 on regional routes up to 75 miles (75mph).
- Nothing with 1/3rd and 2/3rd doors on any of these!
This is just considering what is currently on the railway!
Mk3s in my opinion.
JACK SPILLMAN
Member
They are nice
Kite159
Veteran Member
Eurostars
Apart from the bin under the table are quite comfortable for long distances.
I dislike the mk3s with the IC70(?) style fixed armrests.
Apart from the bin under the table are quite comfortable for long distances.
I dislike the mk3s with the IC70(?) style fixed armrests.
Last edited:
JACK SPILLMAN
Member
I found the mk4 and scot rails class 156 comfy
hairyhandedfool
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 8,837
Based on recent experience, the Pretendolino (standards class), they just don't make them like they used to. I haven't been on many of the other Mk3 coaches for a while, but those I have been on aren't as comfy.
I don't know how anyone can be comfy on a long journey on a 159 or anything else with those seats.....
I don't know how anyone can be comfy on a long journey on a 159 or anything else with those seats.....
SephenWorceste
Member
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2012
- Messages
- 390
My vote goes for First Great Western HST in First Class. I did nearly eleven hours in one day recently. I felt totally relaxed and comfortable even at the end of the trip. FGW are refurbishing and reducing the amount of First Class. I wonder if they are selling off the old seats. A couple of those would be very nice at home.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Love the MKIII ....... However do remember the 4BIG, carriage next the the buffet, lovley comfiortable seats window low in relation to seat and the distant smell of fresh toast coming down the carriage .... Bliss!
Every new coach been on these days seems so sterile....
Every new coach been on these days seems so sterile....
You may be thinking of a different type of unit. The 320s were built around 1990 and are based in Strathclyde.
Trainfan344
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 2,306
Could he be thinking of the Class 321?
satisnek
Member
Do the Chiltern MkIIIa carriages have their original seats? If so, then they used to have a sticky-out bit at the top which supported the neck. Which made all the difference.
BestWestern
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,736
Hmm, be even comfier if they'd specified some padding on the seats. The same operator's 158/159 fleet on the other hand, lovely comfy! Only let down by the inevitable 'toilet smell' in the vestibules, seemingly unavoidable when tanks are fitted. Nothing like as nauseating as a Vomiter though. The 444s have a nice, calm ambience; they've grown on me with regular use. The worst feature of any Desiro though is that hideous non-disabled toilet; stupidly pokey to the point where anything you may be carrying invariably ends up triggering the auto tap, and complete with vile public lav style steel pan. Just a horrible place to be. Needlessly grim on new rolling stock.
Last edited:
180zephyr
Member
frecciarossa (Italy) in an class, mk3s are nice, so are swt 158s and 159s, but 444 seats are horrible, and 377s even worse seats and you don't have any legroom. loco-hauld trains are defiantly right for intercity, as no engine or motor noise.
- Status