Poll: What are your thoughts on travelling on Pendolinos?

bramling · 14 Aug 2017

Starmill said:
More nonsense! Have you not been on a refurbished ScotRail one (that's almost all of them now). What about 170 203 or 208? Or a 171/4?

I like Turbostars a lot, however their interiors have generally not aged well. To be fair most Turbostars except perhaps the Southern ones are very intensively used and are crowded for much of the time they are running. The 185 interior feels a lot more robust, although personally I prefer Turbostars.

RailUK Forums

TT-ONR-NRN · 14 Aug 2017

Talking of 185s what I don't get is how everyone says how horrible and uncomfortable the seats are; yet everyone says how amazing and comfortable 444s are! They're the same seats!

Lrd · 14 Aug 2017

TT-ONR-NRN said:
Talking of 185s what I don't get is how everyone says how horrible and uncomfortable the seats are; yet everyone says how amazing and comfortable 444s are! They're the same seats!

Because on a 185 you never actually get to sit on one as the train is usually wedged to the brim

Lampshade · 14 Aug 2017

TT-ONR-NRN said:
Talking of 185s what I don't get is how everyone says how horrible and uncomfortable the seats are; yet everyone says how amazing and comfortable 444s are! They're the same seats!

Considering the areas these trains operate in, it's hardly likely to be the same people :lol:

Bletchleyite · 14 Aug 2017

Lampshade said:
Considering the areas these trains operate in, it's hardly likely to be the same people

And it might be of note that some[1] 444 users went from old slammers to 444, while TPE users went from 158s (on which the original seating is really quite decent) to 185s. I do like the Desiro seating (even in 3+2 form provided nobody is next to me), but I recognise why people might not.

[1] Those who went Wessie to 444 may be less impressed, the Wessie being the ultimate development of the Mk3, having most of the benefits and almost none of the flaws (excessive lighting, vestibule doors banging back and forth, slamdoors, IC70 seats).

AverageTD · 15 Aug 2017

Why hall the hate for Turbostars and 185s. The Turbostars (especially southern 171s and Chiltern 172s) have good seats and they make the best sounds. The 185s have OK seats but look great but this is getting off topic now

ChiefPlanner · 15 Aug 2017

The HST trains saved the Inter City business. Period. Introduced in 1976 and still more than earning their keep. They have a future life on less demanding work. (some do)

They set a precedent for high class passenger environment.

Many would not agree the same comment for a 390 , especially in standard class.

Bletchleyite · 15 Aug 2017

Perhaps not, but like the HSTs they did rather turn around the fortunes of the WCML. Quite a few on here aren't old enough to remember just how bad it got.

Agent_Squash · 15 Aug 2017

ChiefPlanner said:
The HST trains saved the Inter City business. Period. Introduced in 1976 and still more than earning their keep. They have a future life on less demanding work. (some do)

They set a precedent for high class passenger environment.

Many would not agree the same comment for a 390 , especially in standard class.

Sure, the 390 hasnt changed the railway, but it delivers on what it was sold as and passenger numbers are soaring. Seats really are a matter of choice.

bramling · 15 Aug 2017

AverageTD said:
Why hall the hate for Turbostars and 185s. The Turbostars (especially southern 171s and Chiltern 172s) have good seats and they make the best sounds. The 185s have OK seats but look great but this is getting off topic now

The problem with both is that on many routes they operate very often the train isn't long enough to cater for demand. The 185 in particular has a strange interior layout that doesn't make particularly good use of what space the train does have. Apart from that, and perhaps a slightly inferior build quality and acceleration on the Turbostars, both types are quite satisfactory and fit for purpose - in my view at least.

43096 · 15 Aug 2017

Bletchleyite said:
Perhaps not, but like the HSTs they did rather turn around the fortunes of the WCML. Quite a few on here aren't old enough to remember just how bad it got.

It only got like that because of a deliberate run down by Virgin to make the new trains look better. The fact the 90s and Mark 3s continue to provide excellent service (and are more reliable than their replacements!) in Anglia demonstrates that.

Bletchleyite · 15 Aug 2017

43096 said:
It only got like that because of a deliberate run down by Virgin to make the new trains look better.

That may be true (particularly of XC) though I doubt it was "to make the new trains look better", more likely it was just cutting costs to the bone, but it wasn't great in latter day BR (West Coast) days either.

ChiefPlanner · 15 Aug 2017

Bletchleyite said:
That may be true (particularly of XC) though I doubt it was "to make the new trains look better", more likely it was just cutting costs to the bone, but it wasn't great in latter day BR (West Coast) days either.

Very fair comments , BR Intercity remember was coshed into becoming "subsidy free" , so they jettisoned a pile of services on the margins (Cleethorpes , Salop , Blackpool etc) , and handed over other sections to Regional Railways (South Wales to Birmingham via Gloucester) , these actions of course were driven by then Government policy.

Early days of VWC were a bit compromised by these actions , as well as a fairly hefty removal of management at all levels , and poor XC had severe issues in the last days of LHCS with traction reliability . and one of the fallouts of gauge corner cracking post Hatfield was quite severe damage to the XC coaching stock which experienced major wheel set wear , causing quite extreme short formations as coaches had to be withdrawn for wheel turning or replacement. ("hard" rail edges believed to be the problem and / issues with flange lubrication)

In these scenarios , 390's and 22x were welcomed.

Master29 · 15 Aug 2017

Seacook said:
What happened to an option for "they are okay, not perfect but I prefer them to HSTs?"

I doubt that`ll get used, if at all.

Another point is why have 140mph when they can only do 125?

shaun · 15 Aug 2017

Used to hate them when I travelled fortnightly up the WCML, found them claustrophobic and cramped. Also thought the ride was rough and the tilting made me feel sick... Recently caught one from Edinburgh to Wolverhampton though (after spending weekend on HSTs) and it was fine! Not sure if they are maintained better these days or I had an exceptionally good unit, but I would happily travel in one again for that length of time. Some improvements could be made to the interior though, to make them a bit more comfortable (can be done, see Trenitalia).

route101 · 15 Aug 2017

The one thing for them is length . Pretty fast too coming out of stations .Never really notice tilt .

Bletchleyite · 15 Aug 2017

shaun said:
(can be done, see Trenitalia).

I actually really dislike the New Pendolino seating. It's too narrow, and poor seat-back design means no legroom despite generous spacing. And they have the stupid small litter bins, which take up legroom on the window seat and take more time to empty than picking it up off the floor.

A set of Grammers wouldn't go amiss, though.

Bletchleyite · 15 Aug 2017

bramling said:
The problem with both is that on many routes they operate very often the train isn't long enough to cater for demand. The 185 in particular has a strange interior layout that doesn't make particularly good use of what space the train does have. Apart from that, and perhaps a slightly inferior build quality and acceleration on the Turbostars, both types are quite satisfactory and fit for purpose - in my view at least.

Indeed, they both do the job but for those flaws. The Class 172 is a much higher quality train than the Class 170, though - I think Bombardier must have put significant effort into sorting out the build quality problems that pervaded the ribbon-glazed *Star fleets.

The biggest problem with those classes of regional DMU is that they are all one coach too short. Any 2s should have been 3s, and any 3s should have been 4s.

Clip · 16 Aug 2017

I enjoy being on them and the only real issue is the legroom in standard - but that's why I always get an aisle seat if I happen to go in there

TT-ONR-NRN · 16 Aug 2017

The new pendolino seats are awful. Totally agree with Post #166

TT-ONR-NRN · 18 Aug 2017

Would it be possible to fit Pendolinos with VTEC style seats?

cactustwirly · 18 Aug 2017

TT-ONR-NRN said:
Would it be possible to fit Pendolinos with VTEC style seats?

Yes, but the grammer seats in GW HSTs would be better

TT-ONR-NRN · 18 Aug 2017

cactustwirly said:
Yes, but the grammer seats in GW HSTs would be better

Could you fit VTEC seats onto a pendolino in the same seating plan the 390s have now? Or are the seats much bigger?

GW HST seats would maybe work, but they're rather a marmite thing. Love them or loathe them.

AnonymousUser1 · 18 Aug 2017

DarloRich said:
Things i like about Pendolinos.............................................

Seriously:

They are fast, frequent, reliable, safe and uniform. I am sure for the TOC they are cheaper to run and maintain than the trains they replaced. I am sure they are more flexible to diagram and use than the train the replaced and iam sure they have a longer life than the trains they replaced.

However their crimes are legion:

Claustrophobic

Dark

Equipped with pill box like vision slits not windows
[<sniP>
Horrible things.

care to prognosticate on the fatality rate at Greyrigg if it had been mk 3s ? Mk1s ?

DarloRich · 18 Aug 2017

mph1977 said:
care to prognosticate on the fatality rate at Greyrigg if it had been mk 3s ? Mk1s ?

Surely we can have both safe and comfortable in the same train? However the potential death rate of travelling isnt something that registers on my radar. I run a greater risk of being killed on the way to the station than on the train.

zn1 · 18 Aug 2017

good, fast, very safe, slightly claustrophobic when its at crammed loadings, seating needs more legroom per person.

easy to kip on

apart from that - Good squadron of units, always fell asleep on the DEMUS

the diesel tilters - the same,

keith1879 · 18 Aug 2017

I feel they are very claustrophobic and they don't have to be because Voyagers (delivered at the same time with tilt) have much bigger windows. Also I frequently find Pendolinos to be appallingly hot.

GW43125 · 18 Aug 2017

keith1879 said:
I feel they are very claustrophobic and they don't have to be because Voyagers (delivered at the same time with tilt) have much bigger windows. Also I frequently find Pendolinos to be appallingly hot.

It's luck as to what you get. When I went to Glasgow it was bordering on Siberia. On a 28C day it was beautiful.

keith1879 · 18 Aug 2017

GW43125 said:
It's luck as to what you get. When I went to Glasgow it was bordering on Siberia. On a 28C day it was beautiful.

True. But it shouldn't be.

Howardh · 18 Aug 2017

The carriages spoil the train. Claustrophobic is the word, small windows, bulky seat heads, noisy aircon, makes me feel trapped. First class is really uncomfortable too - the table legs in the way, the bulky arm-rests a nuisance, the constant rattle, and the seats look grubby and dirty!
On the plus side the journey is over quickly, but is 2 hrs to London in a moving box better than 4hrs in relative luxury? Suppose it depends if you are a tourist or a businessman!!

Poll: What are your thoughts on travelling on Pendolinos?

Do you like Class 390 Pendolinos?

Yes, I'm happy to travel on them, they're very good trains.

Meh. They're alright. I prefer HSTs, but Pendolinos are fine.

No. They're awful, rubbish things. Hate travelling on them!

I haven't been on one!

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

On Moderation

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member