Uncomfortable trains of old

Sprinter107 · 1 Apr 2020

davetheguard said:
Of all the first generation DMU's I travelled on, which was probably about three quarters of the various classes, I seem to remember the 101's as having really uncomfortable seats; with a sort of backwards curve that meant the top of your spine was bent backwards in an unnatural way. Far worse than a 700!

I was never that keen on the Metro Cammel sets tbh. Much preferred a suburban or cross country set, where the seats were more comfortable. Saying that didnt mind the 104s. Their seats werent bad.

RailUK Forums

yorksrob · 1 Apr 2020

43096 said:
There are quite a few contenders on this...

- almost any Mark 1 second class seat: it is ironic that we complain about ironing boards and their straight backs, when Mark 1s had near vertical backs and certainly weren’t ergonomically designed.
- add to that the ride quality on the 304s
- Pacer bus seats. The Chapman seats fitted to the 143s make these the best of a bad lot.
- a special place in hell is reserved for the VEPs. Seats as above, but combined with the door and window arrangement giving freezing cold in winter and stifling hot in summer. Special kudos for being totally out of date before they’d even left the drawing board.

Most of the Mk1 EMU/DEMU seats (VEP's included) had seats that curved with the natural shape of the spine, and as a result, I tended to find them perfectly comfortable. Far better than the ironing boards of today.

delt1c · 1 Apr 2020

Sprinter107 said:
I was never that keen on the Metro Cammel sets tbh. Much preferred a suburban or cross country set, where the seats were more comfortable. Saying that didnt mind the 104s. Their seats werent bad.

Cross country 120's and intercity 126's were very comfortable. Suburban 115,117, 118 and 127's were ok but the 116's and 122's were very draughty and seats very thin.
Of EMU's the best had to be Clactons followed by 303's and 311's

Sprinter107 · 1 Apr 2020

delt1c said:
Cross country 120's and intercity 126's were very comfortable. Suburban 115,117, 118 and 127's were ok but the 116's and 122's were very draughty and seats very thin.
Of EMU's the best had to be Clactons followed by 303's and 311's

The seats in the 116s 117s and 118s were identical. All three types operated in my area. The only difference was the 117s and 118s had grab handles whereas the 116s didnt.

delt1c · 1 Apr 2020

Sprinter107 said:
The seats in the 116s 117s and 118s were identical. All three types operated in my area. The only difference was the 117s and 118s had grab handles whereas the 116s didnt.

I always remember the excesive draughts on the 116's , maybe the padding had gone on the Scr ones but they were exceedingly hard. When I moved south to London the 117's always felt a step up

Sprinter107 · 1 Apr 2020

delt1c said:
I always remember the excesive draughts on the 116's , maybe the padding had gone on the Scr ones but they were exceedingly hard. When I moved south to London the 117's always felt a step up

Youre absolutely

Sprinter107 · 1 Apr 2020

Sprinter107 said:
Youre absolutely

delt1c said:
I always remember the excesive draughts on the 116's , maybe the padding had gone on the Scr ones but they were exceedingly hard. When I moved south to London the 117's always felt a step up

You're absolutely right there. The London based 117s were a step up. The padding had gone in very many of the seats in our 116s and 117s, but the London based sets always seemed very well looked after. Their seats always seemed to be exactly as they should be. They were a credit to the staff at Reading who looked after them.

yorksrob · 1 Apr 2020

delt1c said:
Cross country 120's and intercity 126's were very comfortable. Suburban 115,117, 118 and 127's were ok but the 116's and 122's were very draughty and seats very thin.
Of EMU's the best had to be Clactons followed by 303's and 311's

Phase 1 CIG surely.

hexagon789 · 1 Apr 2020

Journeyman said:
There seems to be a common view these days that modern trains are all gruesomely uncomfortable, and all older trains provided superior comfort. However, I've never been convinced that this is the case. Plenty of older trains provided grim travel experiences.

I was just looking at some photos and reading some descriptions of the Southern's 2-HAL units of 1939. Compared to the cozy and inviting BILs of a few years earlier, they had decidedly miserable and meanly appointed interiors. The seats in third class were very upright and had very thin cushions - easily the ironing boards of their day. I don't think many trains before or since were quite that bad.

I'm sure there's plenty of other examples of nasty, uncomfortable trains in the past - any ideas?

As much as I may miss them, I can't say the 314s were comfortable really (seats not great, rather thin and bare, though the ride quality was quite decent) and they were very draughty standing at stations.

YorksDMU · 1 Apr 2020

I think the Derby class 108 lightweight DMU’s must also be up there as one of the worst trains, since a combination of hard seats and a very lively and bouncy ride made for some most interesting experiences.
Late January, 1979, I travelled on the 09.44 to York from Hull. It was a refurbished 108, DMBS + DTCL. I got in the front of the DMBS and sat behind the drivers cab so I could enjoy the view in the usual way.
We got away from Hull and I could tell it was going to be a lively ride since I was bouncing up and down in the seat. On going over the diamond crossing at Melton, the train was travelling at about 60 mph. We took off! I left my seat. I’ve never been so frightened on a train. Thankfully it didn’t happen again, but I recall someone saying that the unit would be going for shopping after reaching York.
Another journey on a 108 was in a TSL, from Bridlington to Beverley. It was late September, 1976.
The ride was quite alarming, and combined with the little seats, it was a lively journey all the way to Beverley.
It’s interesting that so many 108’s have been preserved. I’m not sure I wish to have a ride in one with the memories it would provoke.

Fleetwood Boy · 1 Apr 2020

hexagon789 said:
As much as I may miss them, I can't say the 314s were comfortable really (seats not great, rather thin and bare, though the ride quality was quite decent) and they were very draughty standing at stations.

Funny - each to their own. I found 314s more comfortable than 318s and 320s, which are a pretty miserable replacement on my morning commute, as was. My current commute is very comfortable nowadays, but then I chose the sofa after trying out several, a luxury you don’t get when commuting by train!

Fleetwood Boy · 1 Apr 2020

Sprinter107 said:
All dmus rattled to an extent, but it seems the Cravens ones were worse than any other from what I've read. It would be interesting to know what it was that Cravens did, or didn't do, during construction, to make them that bad.

I always wondered that. My worst experience was on one from Blackpool North to Preston, to connect onto the European to Harwich en route to Hamburg. Bounced so much that I literally hit my head off the luggage rack and turned up to see my fiancée with a whopping bruise.

Fleetwood Boy · 1 Apr 2020

D1537 said:
Given that MkI hauled stock survived into the early 90s, I'm pretty sure that most of us aren't 60+ ! I'm in my early 50s, and was commuting to work in my early 20s on MkI loco-hauled trains.

Think my last ever Mark 1 journey was on a Glasgow Fair holiday relief to the Royal Scot in 1986. Left 8 minutes behind the main train which was gleaming Mark 3s and an 87. We had externally tatty Mark 1s and an 81.

Set off like a bat out of hell, stormed over Beattock and then were checked all the way into Carlisle. Repeat performance over Shap, and checked again running into Preston.

Pulled into platform 6 (very unusual in 1986, rarely used) to find the Royal Scot just departing on time from platform 4.

We’d basically knocked 8 minutes off the Royal Scot schedule including an additional stop at Carlisle.

A bit off topic, sorry, but the comfort of those Mark 1s that day was great.

hexagon789 · 1 Apr 2020

Fleetwood Boy said:
Funny - each to their own. I found 314s more comfortable than 318s and 320s, which are a pretty miserable replacement on my morning commute, as was. My current commute is very comfortable nowadays, but then I chose the sofa after trying out several, a luxury you don’t get when commuting by train!

I'd say 318s are marginally more comfortable.

leytongabriel · 1 Apr 2020

DMU at speed on Ely-Norwich service with bus type seats. 73 ish. Like being inside a pneumatic drill. Everything vibrating shaking and rattling. Would it have been it a Cravens? Very lightly loaded and no wonder!

hexagon789 · 1 Apr 2020

leytongabriel said:
DMU at speed on Ely-Norwich service with bus type seats. 73 ish. Like being inside a pneumatic drill. Everything vibrating shaking and rattling. Would it have been it a Cravens? Very lightly loaded and no wonder!

There were some 105s allocated to the Eastern Region for Norfolk branch lines as new, very possible some of those remained into the 1970s but obviously spread out more given many of those branch lines would be closed through the preceding decade

leytongabriel · 1 Apr 2020

Ah, thanks

Journeyman · 2 Apr 2020

yorksrob said:
Most of the Mk1 EMU/DEMU seats (VEP's included) had seats that curved with the natural shape of the spine, and as a result, I tended to find them perfectly comfortable. Far better than the ironing boards of today.

Nah, VEPs were ghastly. The seats were well-cushioned, but they were very cramped, and the multiple doors made them draughty and noisy as hell.

Journeyman · 2 Apr 2020

hexagon789 said:
As much as I may miss them, I can't say the 314s were comfortable really (seats not great, rather thin and bare, though the ride quality was quite decent) and they were very draughty standing at stations.

The PEPs haven't aged well. The biggest flaw, of course, is the dreadful seat/window alignment, which even extensive refurbishment hasn't been able to fix. Ride quality was always good, though.

AM9 · 2 Apr 2020

yorksrob said:
Phase 1 CIG surely.

I don't remember the Phase Is but the 421s on the Portsmouth Direct were rubbish with foam over plywood. Of their day, the 309s were probably the most comfortable EMUs, especially the buffet car with its 2+1 seating. Their Commonwealth bogies with the expreimental wheel profiles also gave a reasonable ride on the mediocre GEML at 100mph.

Sprinter107 · 2 Apr 2020

I'd have lived a ride on an original class 309. I've read a lot about them. I only managed to ride one when they got transferred to Regional Railways, even though it was refurbished I did think it was a nice unit.

yorksrob · 2 Apr 2020

Journeyman said:
Nah, VEPs were ghastly. The seats were well-cushioned, but they were very cramped, and the multiple doors made them draughty and noisy as hell.

They were only cramped in the crush. They were quite spacious in the off-peak times.

I also used to enjoy sitting next to an open droplight in the summer !

yorksrob · 2 Apr 2020

AM9 said:
I don't remember the Phase Is but the 421s on the Portsmouth Direct were rubbish with foam over plywood. Of their day, the 309s were probably the most comfortable EMUs, especially the buffet car with its 2+1 seating. Their Commonwealth bogies with the expreimental wheel profiles also gave a reasonable ride on the mediocre GEML at 100mph.

The Poertsmouth ones (phase 2) were a bit more basic (I prefer foam over plywood to a lot of todays very hard seats), but the phase 1's were a lot more luxurious - like armchairs.

hexagon789 · 2 Apr 2020

Journeyman said:
The PEPs haven't aged well. The biggest flaw, of course, is the dreadful seat/window alignment, which even extensive refurbishment hasn't been able to fix. Ride quality was always good, though.

I'd say the seats were the biggest downfall, the next being the entirely driver controlled doors meaning regardless of whether anyone used them, all doors would open at stations and stay open allowing in draughts of freezing cold air in the winter.

yorksrob · 2 Apr 2020

hexagon789 said:
I'd say the seats were the biggest downfall, the next being the entirely driver controlled doors meaning regardless of whether anyone used them, all doors would open at stations and stay open allowing in draughts of freezing cold air in the winter.

Also that particular generation of trains had very poor window alignment. Not an issue for some, but it is for me !

hexagon789 · 2 Apr 2020

yorksrob said:
Also that particular generation of trains had very poor window alignment. Not an issue for some, but it is for me !

Worse behind the cabs, it's not great on 318/320s either

satisnek · 5 Apr 2020

I get the impression that Third Class seating on pre-Mk1 stock was often nothing special. Certainly the GWR compartment coaches on the Severn Valley aren't particularly great - the seats themselves are quite nice and squashy but the backs are bolt-upright and rock hard!

hexagon789 · 5 Apr 2020

satisnek said:
I get the impression that Third Class seating on pre-Mk1 stock was often nothing special. Certainly the GWR compartment coaches on the Severn Valley aren't particularly great - the seats themselves are quite nice and squashy but the backs are bolt-upright and rock hard!

That was probably part of the idea to get those who once travelled second class when it existed (or one could say those who were likely to have if it still existed), to pay to travel first class if they could by making more if a distinction in comfort levels

Gwenllian2001 · 7 Apr 2020

My favourite loco hauled was Hawksworth designed stock. The seats were very comfortable with great support for the lower back.

philthetube · 7 Apr 2020

Journeyman said:
What were the last wooden seated trains to operate in this country? I've only ever seen them on narrow gauge heritage railways.

When did the great orme tram become heritage??

Uncomfortable trains of old

Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member