80x seating - Fainsa vs. what Lumo/Avanti are using

[Bletchleyite]

It's the lack of lean I struggle with on the 80x seats, so sounds quite promising! All of this sounds like great news just as I'm starting to resume regular trips down to London.

I find the issue with Sophias is pretty much the same as the OP describes. The seat base is shaped a bit like this, i.e. the back of the cushion is more than twice the thickness of the underthigh bit:

front - back
****\____/


The main problem I find with them is that you can feel where it drops as the cushion is too soft. The heavier you are, the worse it is, which is why some can't feel it. It's less of an issue on very new units, but as they get older they all collapse and it happens.

You can see why this is if you see the slightly odd shape of cushion they are actually designed for. If fitted with this type of cushion, neither bit is too thin.

The problem is thus that DaFT and FirstGroup cheaped out.

Fainsa Sophia seats - photo from the Compin Fainsa website - note the raised bit at the front

 

[Energy]

The problem is thus that DaFT and FirstGroup cheaped out

Not really FirstGroups fault. For the 800s DfT specified the interior and it was too late to change for GWR, for the GWR 802s the DfT insisted on them having the same interior as the 800s.

For the HT and TPE 802s Hitachi were pretty limited in capacity (otherwise TPE would have likely gone all 802s) so its possible (this bit is speculative, I have no insider knowledge) that Hitachi didn't give FG a lot of time to do the interior specification so there may have not been enough time to get a new seat approved.

 

[superalbs]

Lumo seat is called 'Transcal Aerolite'.

I really think the unacceptable Fainsa seats should all be ripped out and replaced with Transcal at this point.

The two aren't even comparable, with the Fainsa resulting in immediate discomfort, whereas the Transcal is easily tolerable for many hours.

Whilst the 800-alikes are all really flawed trains in general, it's easier to overlook these problems if I am at least able to get comfortable.

Fainsa Sophia seats - photo from the Compin Fainsa website - note the raised bit at the front

This variant (as used on commuter trains in Germany) is FAR better. I still think they're pretty poor seats in this guise, but this variant is nicer.

 

[DanNCL]

I really think the unacceptable Fainsa seats should all be ripped out and replaced with Transcal at this point.

This forum needs a like button!

 

[Energy]

I really think the unacceptable Fainsa seats should all be ripped out and replaced with Transcal at this point.

Also got to be reasonable, that would be very expensive.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

You can get naff Grammer seats too, now.
Just right for those 5-hour London-Scotland journeys..

Seat designed for facing in either direction | Metro Report International | Railway Gazette International

SEAT: Grammer has launched its Ubility Light seat, which is designed with ‘innovative minimalism’ to enable passengers on high-density urban trains and buses to sit facing in either direction without the need for any conversion.

The seat has an ultra-lightweight aluminium frame covered with a durable knitted fabric, and a lower cross member coated with a preformed rigid foam pad to act as a seat.
‘You’re immediately surprised when you sit down’, said Dr Andreas Diehl, President of the manufacturer’s Commercial Vehicles division. ‘That’s because our ergonomic combination of a textile backrest and foam pad provides excellent seating comfort on short and medium-haul urban routes — in both directions of travel.’

 

[dodecahedron67]

Is it only me on this forum who actually thinks the 80x seats are ok?

Not the *best* by any means but having done 1st & standard journeys on both LNER & TPE my (seating) preference is TPE 1st > LNER/TPE Std > LNER 1st (the headrest is just a solid block on LNER which ruins an otherwise nice product)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is it only me on this forum who actually thinks the 80x seats are ok?

If they'd just stick a piece of wood or metal under the base cushion so it didn't have the dip you can feel, I'd think they were fine. Apart from that specific aspect they are very similar to Grammer E3000s or FISA LEANs.

It seems clear from the picture above that the problem is that the UK has installed them with a type of cushion for which they were not designed.

 

[Halish Railway]

What are the armrests like on the Lumo seats? The ones on the Sophias are extremely unpleasant as they cause my elbow to ache fairly quickly.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Is it only me on this forum who actually thinks the 80x seats are ok?

Not the *best* by any means but having done 1st & standard journeys on both LNER & TPE my (seating) preference is TPE 1st > LNER/TPE Std > LNER 1st (the headrest is just a solid block on LNER which ruins an otherwise nice product)

I find them very adequate. Nothing strong either way tbh in terms of my feelings.

 

[superalbs]

What are the armrests like on the Lumo seats? The ones on the Sophias are extremely unpleasant as they cause my elbow to ache fairly quickly.

Very small, but they are covered in cloth, so much better as a result.

 

[greyman42]

Is it only me on this forum who actually thinks the 80x seats are ok?

There are others but only a small minority i think.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Is it only me on this forum who actually thinks the 80x seats are ok?

Not the *best* by any means but having done 1st & standard journeys on both LNER & TPE my (seating) preference is TPE 1st > LNER/TPE Std > LNER 1st (the headrest is just a solid block on LNER which ruins an otherwise nice product)

An LNER Azuma Sophia has thick moquette and I find it very comfortable

 

[greyman42]

An LNER Azuma Sophia has thick moquette and I find it very comfortable

Dis you ever travel an mark 1 stock and if so did you find that comfortable?

 

[Bletchleyite]

An LNER Azuma Sophia has thick moquette and I find it very comfortable

All Sophias have the same type of cushion. It's just that some have collapsed and some haven't yet.

 

[jh64]

Is it only me on this forum who actually thinks the 80x seats are ok?

Not the *best* by any means but having done 1st & standard journeys on both LNER & TPE my (seating) preference is TPE 1st > LNER/TPE Std > LNER 1st (the headrest is just a solid block on LNER which ruins an otherwise nice product)

No real complaints here, I did Newcastle > Kings Cross and back last weekend and I'm having real trouble seeing where all the torture machine comments are coming from.

 

[mightyena]

Dis you ever travel an mark 1 stock and if so did you find that comfortable?

I'm gonna preface this by saying I've yet to travel on an 80x, but I'm assuming that the sophias in those are broadly similar to the ones in 1st class on a 700. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that. Also I'm not the person you replied to, but throwing my 2p in anyway.

With that said, yes I have travelled on Mk1s, and I find them very comfortable, for a little while. After that they make my back tired

Having said that, I find the oft-praised IC70 seats found on Chiltern and EMT/EMR's Mk3s to be far and away the most uncomfortable seats I've ever had to endure.

Second to those is whatever is in 168s (the "main" seats, the higher backed ones at the carriage ends are fine), and the Mk3 EMU "5cm from the floor deckchairs"

At the other end of the scale, I think my favourite seats are probably the Grammers found on the 2+2 350s and 444s

 

[Class360/1]

No real complaints here, I did Newcastle > Kings Cross and back last weekend and I'm having real trouble seeing where all the torture machine comments are coming from.

I’ve also been on 3 long to short journeys on a gwr 800 and only my elbow was a tad sore thanks o the armrest being too narrow.

Agree with you, don’t know where these torture comments are coming fRom

 

[Wolfie]

Dis you ever travel an mark 1 stock and if so did you find that comfortable?

Yes and not really but then l don't like over-stuffed old sofas either.

I'm gonna preface this by saying I've yet to travel on an 80x, but I'm assuming that the sophias in those are broadly similar to the ones in 1st class on a 700. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that. Also I'm not the person you replied to, but throwing my 2p in anyway.

With that said, yes I have travelled on Mk1s, and I find them very comfortable, for a little while. After that they make my back tired

Having said that, I find the oft-praised IC70 seats found on Chiltern and EMT/EMR's Mk3s to be far and away the most uncomfortable seats I've ever had to endure.

Second to those is whatever is in 168s (the "main" seats, the higher backed ones at the carriage ends are fine), and the Mk3 EMU "5cm from the floor deckchairs"

At the other end of the scale, I think my favourite seats are probably the Grammers found on the 2+2 350s and 444s

As someone with back issues l am in broad agreement.

 

[philosopher]

With that said, yes I have travelled on Mk1s, and I find them very comfortable, for a little while. After that they make my back tired

Having said that, I find the oft-praised IC70 seats found on Chiltern and EMT/EMR's Mk3s to be far and away the most uncomfortable seats I've ever had to endure.

I think seats can be definitely be too soft, Chiltern’s IC70 seats you do feel like you are sinking into them. They do also seem quite close to the floor, which can’t be great for taller people. So some may find them very comfortable, others though will likely find them annoying.

Train seats to me are a bit like mattresses, some will like them hard, others soft and others prefer them to be in the middle. The best seat should be one that is neither not too hard nor too soft. Those who like hard seats may still find them a bit uncomfortable, but they would still find them more comfortable then a soft seat such as the IC70.

 

[david1212]

I'm gonna preface this by saying I've yet to travel on an 80x, but I'm assuming that the sophias in those are broadly similar to the ones in 1st class on a 700. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that. Also I'm not the person you replied to, but throwing my 2p in anyway.

With that said, yes I have travelled on Mk1s, and I find them very comfortable, for a little while. After that they make my back tired

Having said that, I find the oft-praised IC70 seats found on Chiltern and EMT/EMR's Mk3s to be far and away the most uncomfortable seats I've ever had to endure.

Second to those is whatever is in 168s (the "main" seats, the higher backed ones at the carriage ends are fine), and the Mk3 EMU "5cm from the floor deckchairs"

At the other end of the scale, I think my favourite seats are probably the Grammers found on the 2+2 350s and 444s

I think seats can be definitely be too soft, Chiltern’s IC70 seats you do feel like you are sinking into them. They do also seem quite close to the floor, which can’t be great for taller people. So some may find them very comfortable, others though will likely find them annoying.

Train seats to me are a bit like mattresses, some will like them hard, others soft and others prefer them to be in the middle. The best seat should be one that is neither not too hard nor too soft. Those who like hard seats may still find them a bit uncomfortable, but they would still find them more comfortable then a soft seat such as the IC70.

I have travelled much less over the last 18 months than normal so still have only had two short trips on a GWR 80x. However it was enough to make me think twice about a longer trip. The rough ride and track / train noise at least on the route I was on added to the poor experience. Ever since I first encountered the ironing board seats in a 377 sub-class I have found the hour between Victoria and Brighton more than long enough. Just the thought of Paddington to Penzance or Kings Cross to Edinburgh at least with LNER is akin to a punishment.

In comparison I have always been comfortable for 90 minutes in a Chiltern 168. Indeed I have often said train designers need to look very carefully at them as a starting point for interior design not just seats but layout with a good mix of tables and airline. The grey colour is not inspiring but practical.

 

[Starmill]

They're also in First Class on a 385. They don't appear to have the issues there with the base design / cushion issue that they do on 80x.

 

[mightyena]

I think seats can be definitely be too soft, Chiltern’s IC70 seats you do feel like you are sinking into them. They do also seem quite close to the floor, which can’t be great for taller people. So some may find them very comfortable, others though will likely find them annoying.

Train seats to me are a bit like mattresses, some will like them hard, others soft and others prefer them to be in the middle. The best seat should be one that is neither not too hard nor too soft. Those who like hard seats may still find them a bit uncomfortable, but they would still find them more comfortable then a soft seat such as the IC70.

I think for me it's not so much that thy're too soft per se, but their extremely reclined position causes my lower back to start aching after a while, as well as being annoying to get into and out of.

I reckon I probably do prefer slightly on the harder side, but again its not so much the hardness, more the actual seating position, an IC70 makes me slouch in an uncomfortable manner if I want to interact with the table.

That said, I think I'm the opposite of 90% of people on here, since I find IC70s genuinely painful to spend long journeys in, and I don't really have a problem with ironing boards. They're fine. Not great, but acceptable (my main issue with them as found on stuff like 700s is they're too narrow/close to the wall rather than a shape issue). I will say having done St Pancras to Loughborough on an EMR HST, I'd genuinely have preferred a 700!

 

[Kite159]

One improvement I would make to the style of seats on the Lumo trains is to make the window side armrest moveable, like it is on the other seats on the 80Xs.

Then if anybody wants to have it lowered then it can be lowered, if it's of little use to someone due to their height then they can raise it and use the more comfortable window sill.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They're also in First Class on a 385. They don't appear to have the issues there with the base design / cushion issue that they do on 80x.

They do once the base has collapsed. 700s too.

I looked round the mock up at Waverley before they were built, and having sat in them for the first time told the member of staff I would pay extra NOT to sit in 1st. I recall them not liking this.

LNR are making the same idiotic move in the 730s.

 

[RailWonderer]

They do once the base has collapsed. 700s too.

I looked round the mock up at Waverley before they were built, and having sat in them for the first time told the member of staff I would pay extra NOT to sit in 1st. I recall them not liking this.

LNR are making the same idiotic move in the 730s.

The 700s, refurbished 350s and the GN 387s are the same in terms of poor first class offerings. It's almost like there is some conspiracy to make first class so bad they have an excuse to kill it. Unfortunately the truth is that the companies are too unwilling to find alternative seating for routes where there are enough affluent commuters that would pay more for superior seating. If 379s were refurbed and transferred on the Cambridge fasts, they would amost certainly seen an uptake in first ticket buys.

As for the 385s, the fast Glasgow - Edinburgh (the main route for the 385 subclass with 1st) is a 50 minute journey, so first class was only added to tick a box hence no surprise that Scotrail didn't bother with anything better.

 

[Mikey C]

The 700s, refurbished 350s and the GN 387s are the same in terms of poor first class offerings. It's almost like there is some conspiracy to make first class so bad they have an excuse to kill it. Unfortunately the truth is that the companies are too unwilling to find alternative seating for routes where there are enough affluent commuters that would pay more for superior seating. If 379s were refurbed and transferred on the Cambridge fasts, they would amost certainly seen an uptake in first ticket buys.

As for the 385s, the fast Glasgow - Edinburgh (the main route for the 385 subclass with 1st) is a 50 minute journey, so first class was only added to tick a box hence no surprise that Scotrail didn't bother with anything better.

I would disagree with the 700s, as there they made standard class even worse, to maintain the differential

What is confusing on Thameslink are the number of routes that don't have 1st class, but have the 700s with 1st class seating. Especially when they all operate through the core.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would disagree with the 700s, as there they made standard class even worse, to maintain the differential

What is confusing on Thameslink are the number of routes that don't have 1st class, but have the 700s with 1st class seating. Especially when they all operate through the core.

The First Class policy on Thameslink is weird. Either get rid of it or make it always 1st, and adjust fares so people will upgrade in sufficient numbers.

 

[Starmill]

The First Class policy on Thameslink is weird. Either get rid of it or make it always 1st, and adjust fares so people will upgrade in sufficient numbers.

I really don't get it at all. But then, the rolling stock specification has been allowed to become entirely divorced from any form of commercial strategy to upsell.

 

[RailWonderer]

I really don't get it at all. But then, the rolling stock specification has been allowed to become entirely divorced from any form of commercial strategy to upsell.

Exactly. Although it is not the DafT's job to commercially upsell but to provide what it sees as essential for train travel of a given region. The ToC then has less options when it comes to running commerical promotions like first upgrades, free food etc. Speccing trains like the 701s and 720s with such dense seating took no account of the money in first class seasons tickets GA was making and even I presume SWR. The IC 745 however does have first and is still well loaded at most times of day.