• 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!

Ugliest Train in the UK?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Non Multi

Member
Joined
11 Dec 2017
Messages
1,117
Class 252 power car (Prototype HST) - main cab externally looked very odd, like a robot with buffers, thankfully Kenneth Grange sorted out the appearance of the production HST.
Class 140 Pacer - functional in appearance to say the least.
Class 251/261 - the Blue Pullman with yellow ends. The application of full yellow ends simply didn't suit the cab shape. The units with reversed blue-grey livery looked awful when dirty.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

47802

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2013
Messages
3,455
Well the 230 is a good candidate but surely the winner should be the early 317's and 455's and in particular southern managed to make them even uglier removing the corridor connection.
 

LiftFan

Member
Joined
27 May 2016
Messages
339
The Southern 455s look horrendous, and so do the 350 LNWR colours and 172 WMR colours.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Hello folks!

Today i have a little bit of a poll for you all, What do you think is the ugliest train in britain?

You can pick many choices or choose a different one not in the list (please specify).

Class 142

Class 41

Class 156

Class 460

Class 43 (Warship Class)

Class 700

Class 800/1/2

Class 385

Hope you enjoy picking!

Class 380, 385, 700.
 

Harbornite

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2016
Messages
3,634
Warships aren't great, rather dumpy looking; they look especially bad with full yellow ends. The Fell diesel wasn't great, Co-Bos are also bad looking, as was prototype HST power car. Ugliest DMUs IMO include the Junipers (pre modification) and Aventras.
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,688
Location
Devon
I’m with those that have said the Fell locomotive. Hideous.477A6338-14B8-4790-AFC3-37D97323EEF1.jpeg Photo (not mine) of 10100 - A face only a mother could love. Could bite an apple through a tennis racket as they say.

B0B4F055-2EE3-4723-88A1-258D7C11C3B7.jpeg
Photo (not mine) of 10100. What an absolute munter...
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,624
Location
Another planet...
The 140 at least looks like a train though- the production Pacers look like they'd collapse into matchwood if they hit even a feeble obstruction on the line! 141s weren't pretty either though, especially before they had their mid-life nose-job.

151s weren't great-looking either, but the worst for me was the "PEP" prototypes... hideous things!
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,545
Location
Elginshire
Ugliest locomotive currently in service has to be the Class 70 but, to be fair, it wasn't designed to look pretty. Class 67s are fairy high up on my list too, although they're more plain than ugly.

If we're talking about locos no longer in service, I'd have to go with class 21/22/29, and possibly the Warships that NBL built.

With regard to "modern" multiple units, I really do not like the 700/707 look. Going back a bit further, I'm not a fan of the PEP stock either, but livery application can make all the difference
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,688
Location
Devon
Ugliest locomotive currently in service has to be the Class 70 but, to be fair, it wasn't designed to look pretty. Class 67s are fairy high up on my list too, although they're more plain than ugly.

If we're talking about locos no longer in service, I'd have to go with class 21/22/29, and possibly the Warships that NBL built.

With regard to "modern" multiple units, I really do not like the 700/707 look. Going back a bit further, I'm not a fan of the PEP stock either, but livery application can make all the difference
I must admit that a rusty class 21/22 with bits of lower body panels missing and those droopy windscreens takes some beating in the aesthetically challenged category...
Still think the Fell is worse though. Just.
 

neontrix

Member
Joined
6 Jan 2017
Messages
34
The class 220 and 221 always look pretty ugly to me. They have a gormless ‘face’ - but I think the 222 is actually pretty decent looking, helped by the EMT livery in my opinion.

Class 374 is also not much of a looker, particularly when compared to the 373, which in the old livery looked gorgeous, and just fast. The livery on the class 374 certainly works against the train geometry.
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,545
Location
Elginshire
I must admit that a rusty class 21/22 with bits of lower body panels missing and those droopy windscreens takes some beating in the aesthetically challenged category...
Still think the Fell is worse though. Just.
I have to say I'd never heard of said "Fell" locomotive until now, and I'd never seen a picture either. It definitely looks as if it fell - certainly not from heaven. It looks like a very deformed "Peak".
 

trash80

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2015
Messages
1,204
Location
Birches Green
Amazing how opinions can differ, some of the "ugliest" listed in this thread i think are among the best looking :D

Class 140 though always looked horrible, when i was a kid and it appeared in the railway magazines i quickly changed the page so i wouldn't get nightmares
 

73001

Member
Joined
2 Jun 2010
Messages
396
Location
Liverpool
If we're going back a bit then the class 28 Co-Bo isn't much of a looker... It would appear that they just gave up before they finished it. That said, the "Fell" loco above which I had also never heard of is pretty horrendous.
 

ChilternTurbo

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2016
Messages
302
The Class 58 for me. I appreciate they were designed to do a specific job but to me they have all the grace, style and aerodynamics of a Portakabin....

I also find the Class 374 Velaro lacks the good looks of the old 373s.
 

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
I’m with those that have said the Fell locomotive. Hideous.View attachment 44895 Photo (not mine) of 10100 - A face only a mother could love. Could bite an apple through a tennis racket as they say.

View attachment 44896
Photo (not mine) of 10100. What an absolute munter...
Oh hell, that is bad. I'd never seen that before. That is worse that a Class 70, but it's still better than than the Cumbernauld Shopping Centre.

I went to read about how it worked - what a truly bizarre creation into the bargain.
 

Fincra5

Established Member
Joined
6 Jun 2009
Messages
2,486
385 is vulgar. Its like there was a glitch in the CAD software and just left it.
 

KevinTurvey

Member
Joined
9 Oct 2016
Messages
205
Class 458 as introduced
Class 67's with the single piece flat windscreen, like the class 70's, just does not sit right with the rest of the bodywork.
The class 321 style, (although not particularly ugly) when introduced looked to me like a late 80's car, they still do and look more dated than older stock.
 

LeeLivery

Established Member
Joined
13 Jul 2014
Messages
1,462
Location
London
I'd never call a Desiro City ugly, I think it's one of the best looking recent units. The 345s on the other hand, are rather ugly. Most ugly? 385s, followed by 175s, 380s and every Pacer.

That Fell is horrendous.
 

Parallel

Established Member
Joined
9 Dec 2013
Messages
3,929
I think 143s and 144s look fine and face on, a lot more modern than their years. I think 313s and Southern’s 455s are pretty ugly though.
 

Rail Blues

Member
Joined
2 Aug 2016
Messages
608
Yes the 321s seem to look very much of their era in a way that the 319s and 323s which were built at roughly the same time don't. Mind you I quite like the fact the 321 evoke the time they were built and aesthetically they're probably my favourite EMU.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top