Are Class 700’s really that bad?

[91103eastcoast]

Apart from the interior being a bit clinical, my only issue with the 700s is the toilets. They seem to be a graffiti magnet, plus the soap is all watery and squirts everywhere making it look like I’ve had an accident in the toilet.

 

[Snow1964]

So much of this thread is personal preferences supported by well crafted anecdotes. The seats are of a profile recommended for good posture by most orthopedic and musculo-skeletal professionals for normal healthy individuals. There are more normal healthy adults than those with specific spinal issues, however even for that group, many would benefit from better posture

This is factually incorrect, most recommend seats that are adjusted to give good posture. Not some fixed average where an average sized person can get something close to good posture, but doesn’t really fit anyone not of average size.

I’m attaching pdf to how seats should be set to give comfort, it is for driving in car seats, but that is main alternative to taking the train so appropriate. (I am not going to quote it as full of diagrams and text will be meaningless without them)

https://www.physiomed.co.uk/uploads/guide/file/21/Physiomed_Sitting_Guide_-_Driving_Digital.pdf

Note that comfort also requires body and legs to be straight, not twisted which is virtually impossible in a 700 due to heating ducts forcing legs to the side. So even if the seats are optimal when mounted in a sample room with flat floor, not appropriate in the location they have been installed above bulky ducts.

 

[cactustwirly]

I am unfortunate enough to have to commute by these trains, and I hate them.
Yes, they soak up passengers very effectively due to wide doors and lots of standing space, dwell times are low and the PIS is decent.

Now for the bad points:
- The seats give me backache in a matter of minutes. Even travelling from St Pancras to Blackfriars will give me backache. It's not the lack of padding, but the shape of the seats just doesn't agree with my back. I have no back problems with any others seats and I have no back issues in any other part of my life.
- The window seats have that massive heating duct, and unlike all other trains I've been on, the duct top is sloping not flat, so you can't rest your feet on it. Therefore, you have to encroach on the footwell of the neighbouring seat
- The aisle seats have reduced footroom too, because they decided to make the seat supports diagonal instead of vertical, presumably to make cleaning easier.
- There are no armrests. By backup plan for trains with no armrests is to use the windowsill as an armrest, but you can't on these as the window is too high. Failing that I use the tray table as an armrest, but not all seats on this stock have them.

The train might as well have zero seats as far as I'm concerned, because none of them are usable for me. I always stand for the entire journey, usually in the place where two carriages join, as that is the least busy place. I notice that quite a few people opt to stand for the entire journey too.

Since Covid, I've started driving into the City now at weekends, despite living near near East Croydon station. It is comfier and can be cheaper if you know where to park

Please travel on a 345 to Reading...

The 700s could be a lot worse!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Apart from the interior being a bit clinical, my only issue with the 700s is the toilets. They seem to be a graffiti magnet, plus the soap is all watery and squirts everywhere making it look like I’ve had an accident in the toilet.

Graffiti is a factor of where they run through some quite rough areas, and the bog is the one bit you can't cover in CCTV. One thing that works well is the increasingly common idea of putting sticky backed scenery pictures on the inside of the cubicle. They cheer up what is a very drab grey or white space, and discourage graffiti, and if any is painted it can be easily pulled off and replaced.

 

[Steve Harris]

Please travel on a 345 to Reading...

The 700s could be a lot worse!

Indeed.

If 345's were on Thameslink I'd take the car!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed.

If 345's were on Thameslink I'd take the car!

Must admit I actually prefer the combination of proper width 2+2 and side facing over excessively tight airline seats. The S stock layout, for instance, is really very good, though the air cushion seats are getting knackered. Aren't the 345s similar?

 

[cactustwirly]

Must admit I actually prefer the combination of proper width 2+2 and side facing over excessively tight airline seats. The S stock layout, for instance, is really very good, though the air cushion seats are getting knackered. Aren't the 345s similar?

No the 345s have no padding. They are the hardest seats on the network.
The 2+2s are very far between.

Much rather have a 700 with overhead luggage racks and a decent chance of 2+2 seats. Plus the 700s ride a lot better with no rattles

 

[Energy]

This is factually incorrect, most recommend seats that are adjusted to give good posture. Not some fixed average where an average sized person can get something close to good posture, but doesn’t really fit anyone not of average size.

I’m attaching pdf to how seats should be set to give comfort, it is for driving in car seats, but that is main alternative to taking the train so appropriate. (I am not going to quote it as full of diagrams and text will be meaningless without them)

https://www.physiomed.co.uk/uploads/guide/file/21/Physiomed_Sitting_Guide_-_Driving_Digital.pdf

Note that comfort also requires body and legs to be straight, not twisted which is virtually impossible in a 700 due to heating ducts forcing legs to the side. So even if the seats are optimal when mounted in a sample room with flat floor, not appropriate in the location they have been installed above bulky ducts.

Underfloor heating like the 720s would be an improvement. Having a seat that adjustable will make it thicker, honestly I think making the cushion a bit thicker and the seat slightly less upright is enough.

 

[Mikey C]

There's not much of it, but the transverse seating on the 345s is pretty comfortable, with decent spacing and armrests

Interior walk through Crossrail train seating class 345 Elizabeth Line carriage on commuter train service between Shenfield & London Liverpool Street Stock Photo - Alamy

Download this stock image: Interior walk through Crossrail train seating class 345 Elizabeth Line carriage on commuter train service between Shenfield & London Liverpool Street - PK2YE5 from Alamy's library of millions of high resolution stock photos, illustrations and vectors.

www.alamy.com

 

[Bletchleyite]

Underfloor heating like the 720s would be an improvement. Having a seat that adjustable will make it thicker, honestly I think making the cushion a bit thicker and the seat slightly less upright is enough.

They might have underfloor heating but there is still a massive conduit taking up window seat foot room.

 

[mmh]

Can you actually name these "most orthopedic and musculo-skeletal professionals" or is that just a BS line lifted from a corporate website ?

Thank you, you beat me to asking similar. It surely can't be possible. Everyone is different and of a different size.

 

[Wolfie]

Oh come now, that's got nothing to do with it. The seats are very upright not because the DfT cares about our postures, but to be able to cram more seats in. It's as simple as that.

Evidence for that assertion?

 

[Goldfish62]

Evidence for that assertion?

The evidence is that more seats are crammed in! Why else would the seat rake be at such a ridiculously upright angle? Look back at numerous articles on the subject by Ian Walmsley in Modern Railways. He highlights many attributes including the rake that are geared to making the unique British railway seat a space saver at the expense of comfort.

Belatedly of course the railways and DfT recognise this folly and the Lumo seats with their increased take are the first step in restoring some degree of comfort to our train seats bringing us more in line with the rest of Europe and the world.

 

[Wolfie]

The evidence is that more seats are crammed in! Why else would the seat rake be at such a ridiculously upright angle? Look back at numerous articles on the subject by Ian Walmsley in Modern Railways. He highlights many attributes including the rake that are geared to making the unique British railway seat a space saver at the expense of comfort.

Belatedly of course the railways and DfT recognise this folly and the Lumo seats with their increased take are the first step in restoring some degree of comfort to our train seats bringing us more in line with the rest of Europe and the world.

That'll be no evidence then....

 

[Goldfish62]

That'll be no evidence then....

That's like saying the sky is blue and pointing at it, then still saying there's no evidence the sky is blue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They can also be used to improve legroom for the long-legged. The use of thin and not-heavily-raked seats on the Pendolino refurb will increase legroom significantly without adding any more seats (it actually reduces them by about 10 per train as the luggage racks are being enlarged). The Northern 158s with the ironing boards have excellent legroom, while as-built it's awful on the same layout.

It's not always a bad thing.

As for 700s, I was on one yesterday, and observed that you could make the airline seat legroom quite good by replacing the 4 airline seats by the vehicle end with 2 side-facing and slightly respacing. I'd do that; if seat numbers were the priority they would be 3+2 like the utterly, utterly awful 720s.

 

[43066]

Oh come now, that's got nothing to do with it. The seats are very upright not because the DfT cares about our postures, but to be able to cram more seats in. It's as simple as that.

Surely if anything the DfT would have preferred fewer seats in order to save cost?

Someone mentioned the class 376 above. As someone comfortably over 6” I’d say the airline seats in that are about right in terms of legroom and you’d no doubt lose a few rows from a 700 to achieve that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As someone comfortably over 6” I’d say the airline seats in that are about right in terms of legroom and you’d no doubt lose a few rows from a 700 to achieve that.

Upper leg length is a more important measure. If you're tall in the body they won't be as bad. Simple height isn't a particularly good measure.

With raked seats, upper and lower leg measurements have an effect. That's why if you need to "pack 'em in" upright seats are better.

Personally I find them too tight and would prefer some side-facing to be provided, closer to the S-stock style layout. Indeed yesterday I ended up facing sideways on the 1 side of a 2+1 section because I'd not fit otherwise, but that left some wasted space compared with proper side-facing.

 

[43066]

Upper leg length is a more important measure. If you're tall in the body they won't be as bad. Simple height isn't a particularly good measure.

True, I’m taller in the body so not as bad for me as for others, but I still find the 700s too tight. In 376s I can just about cross my legs in the airline seats!

Personally I find them too tight and would prefer some side-facing to be provided, closer to the S-stock style layout. Indeed yesterday I ended up facing sideways on the 1 side of a 2+1 section because I'd not fit otherwise, but that left some wasted space compared with proper side-facing.

Agreed. Albeit the S8 layout is perhaps a stage too far for the typical GTR routes.

I actually think the 376 layout is close to ideal for purely metro work. Loads of standing room, 2+2 seating with excellent legroom, including some sideways folding seats behind the cabs (alternatively bike/buggy/wheelchair space) and “perches” in the door vestibules.

 

[westcoaster]

I always thought the thin seats and sparse interior was a fire issue/regulations (due to the open nature of the units, first class is more padded due to the flappy door acting as a fire break). Units look drab when someone turns the lights onto standby mode.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I always thought the thin seats and sparse interior was a fire issue/regulations (due to the open nature of the units, first class is more padded due to the flappy door acting as a fire break).

No, as 195s are similarly open and have better seats (still ironing boards, but with the thicker base). Also, fire regulations don't in any way dictate the colour of the seat fabric nor of the lino.

 

[guilbert]

Not sure a door with a 10cm gap is going to be much of a fire break

 

[Goldfish62]

Not sure a door with a 10cm gap is going to be much of a fire break

And it's of course not intended to be. The door provides some privacy for the 1st Class section while maintaining air flow for the HVAC system. This is achieved on earlier Desiros by the use of perforated panels.

 

[387star]

'Change here for other national rail services' what a pointless announcement

 

[Craig1122]

That's like saying the sky is blue and pointing at it, then still saying there's no evidence the sky is blue.

If anyone wants evidence you can go through the Dft spec for franchise bids pre covid. SWR and Anglia are good examples where the only way to meet the requirements was to cram them in. Both ended up with new trains in a 3+2 layout where in reality people are unwilling to use the middle seat. Even more so post covid I suspect.

This does appear to be in answer to passengers saying that getting a seat is a high priority. It's a case of be careful what you wish for as I'm not sure that people complaining about not getting a seat were asking for higher density!

 

[py_megapixel]

If anyone wants evidence you can go through the Dft spec for franchise bids pre covid. SWR and Anglia are good examples where the only way to meet the requirements was to cram them in. Both ended up with new trains in a 3+2 layout where in reality people are unwilling to use the middle seat. Even more so post covid I suspect.

This does appear to be in answer to passengers saying that getting a seat is a high priority. It's a case of be careful what you wish for as I'm not sure that people complaining about not getting a seat were asking for higher density!

SWR's new stock is not 3+2.

 

[Bletchleyite]

SWR's new stock is not 3+2.

I believe it's narrow 2+2, i.e. very similar to the 700, isn't it?

WMT's 196s are also of this layout, albeit with nice seats.

 

[Mikey C]

If anyone wants evidence you can go through the Dft spec for franchise bids pre covid. SWR and Anglia are good examples where the only way to meet the requirements was to cram them in. Both ended up with new trains in a 3+2 layout where in reality people are unwilling to use the middle seat. Even more so post covid I suspect.

This does appear to be in answer to passengers saying that getting a seat is a high priority. It's a case of be careful what you wish for as I'm not sure that people complaining about not getting a seat were asking for higher density!

On the Southeastern Networks, people DO use the middle seats, so it's a bit of a myth that people stand instead

 

[Bletchleyite]

On the Southeastern Networks, people DO use the middle seats, so it's a bit of a myth that people stand instead

You've clearly not been on a 720.

 

[py_megapixel]

I believe it's narrow 2+2, i.e. very similar to the 700, isn't it?

I think so, yes. The aisles look a bit narrower than the Thameslink ones, but I think the Aventras (Aventrae?) have a narrower body overall than the Desiro Cities. The seats are the same "ironing boards", produced by Compin-Fainsa, but it looks like they have considerably more padding than the Thameslink ones.

(All based off photos - I've not actually been on one, obviously!)