Good idea for a poll.
I've heard rave reviews about the Chiltern Mark 3s, but as I haven't travelled on them I don't have any first hand experience. I'm going to go for the XC mark 3s. Yes, XC have done something right! :P Look very smart, comfortable seating, enough tables, pretty good lining up with windows of airline seats, and the lighting is just about right too. Shame everything gets scuffed with the trolley coming down the aisle, but that's about it in term of faults.
The FGW mark 3s are always smart and well presented, but those seats are a bit too high backed for my liking and airline seating can feel a bit claustrophobic.
Except the stupid LED Seat Reservation screens that never work, and the PA Screens that when they do work, seem to show somewhere your never near as the destination. :roll:
While XC's seats are the same as EC's, the seating is high density- a toilet has been removed from each coach to make room for more seats IIRC.
I've never traveled for longer than about 1 hour 45 minutes in a Mallard interior HST (or 225). Can anyone comment on whether it is comfortable to travel from Kings Cross to Inverness?
You missed off the 442s...
442s are close to being Mark 3s, but aren't really. One could also argue I should include other Mark 3 based multiple units such as 150s or 321s, but it's just too confusing. Same reason I didn't include ScotRail, ATW or the Irish Mark 3s; its just easier this way :P
What strikes me odd about this poll currently:
No one at all has voted for the Pretendolino
Greater Anglia not only has some votes, but is ahead of EMT!
Despite being hated on here most of the time, FGW are third and only a little behind the top 2.
As far as I know, and drawing on the written sources I have to hand, right from the introduction of the prototype HST trailer vehicles the length of the saloon windows was designed, as you say, to match the length of a first class seating bay around a table, so that eight bays of 2+1 seating arranged around tables all lined up perfectly with the windows.When introduced the second class mk III coaches had 64 seats, all around tables, all aligned to the windows, and because the window profile was the same for first and second class mk IIIs (unlike mk Is and mk IIs), the legroom was as generous as in a first class coach. This takes some beating IMHO.
The interior of that thing has been refurbished? hock: It's the ropiest looking mark 3 rake out there! Excluding perhaps the Greater Anglia fleet, but if it isn't worse then it's not far off being on a par with them. The standard class interior of the Pretendolino looks like it has been dragged kicking and screaming out of the eighties, with no TLC between then and now. It certainly looks nought like a Pendolino, and just for a change, I don't mean that in a derogatory sense towards Pendolinos.While the Pretendolino's refurbished interior has made the coaches look more modern (and fit in with the fleet of Pendolino's
The Chiltern mark 3s still retain two toilets per carriage, retaining the standard length of passenger saloon for seating. I can't say whether this has been altered with regards to the new power door fitted set though. The removal of one toilet from the Crosscountry TSOs has allowed them to extend the length of the passenger saloon available to them and I agree, has been a very positive move.In reference to XC yes they have removed a toilet but it is a good move, I think chiltern have done the same and that is seen as a good decision. Especially considering the overcrowding on XC.
The 442s are in essence an Intercity EMU that largely uses the standard 23 metre mark 3 body shell with end doors over older Southern region traction equipment, so IMO they very much can be judged to be part of the mark 3 design lineage. This is in stark contrast to the likes of the 150s and 321s, as while the construction of their body shells is derived from the mark 3 carriages, IMO the likeness ends there: They are commuter multiple units with shorter, 20m body shells and 1/3 + 2/3 doors, so cannot be fairly compared to mark 3 coaching stock.442s are close to being Mark 3s, but aren't really. One could also argue I should include other Mark 3 based multiple units such as 150s or 321s, but it's just too confusing. Same reason I didn't include ScotRail, ATW or the Irish Mark 3s; its just easier this way :P