150s vs 153/5

[Mordac]

I've heard various opinions about which of these is worse than the other, so just thought I'd canvass the forum with a poll.

Personally, prefer the 153/5s, no change of 2+3 seating, and at least the Northern versions always feel more spacious and less tired.

EDIT: Can a moderator edit the poll question to say 'Which is your preferred stock?' Sorry for that.

 

[Iskra]

153 or 155 everytime. I prefer pacers to 150's.

 

[pemma]

Up to 80 seats in a 23m carriage in 2+2 formation is preferable to the same number in a 20m carriage in 3+2 formation.

 

[bramling]

I've heard various opinions about which of these is worse than the other, so just thought I'd canvass the forum with a poll.

Personally, prefer the 153/5s, no change of 2+3 seating, and at least the Northern versions always feel more spacious and less tired.

EDIT: Can a moderator edit the poll question to say 'Which is your preferred stock?' Sorry for that.

Too hard to make a binary choice.

2x153 may be preferable to 1x150 on a crowded service simply on seating capacity and absence of 3+2.

Likewise there are different variants of class 150. I most like the FNW refirbished examples with facing seating, these are quite comfortable and acceptable in my view. Meanwhile the DDA toilets now being fitted do have a quite heavily detrimental impact on seating capacity.

Generally 156 or 158 is preferable to both, although having said that legroom on those types is poor too.

 

[J-2739]

153 by a country mile. Four words to describe the 150s; stinky, dirty, cramped and slow. Then again, a 158 absolutely sits on a 153.