Differences Between Various Sprinters Acceleration

[anamyd]

Noticed the latest Rail Express has 0-60 timings for 159/1s now. A rather unimpressive 119 seconds.

For comparison of Sprinter types:

158/8 - 98 seconds
156 - 124 seconds
153 - 156 seconds

"158/8" doesn't exist. 158-7xx and 158-8xx are 158/0, and 158-9xx are 158/9.

 

[anamyd]

I cant help but think that the 159 400hp engines have been derated. After all 400hp should be quicker than the normal 350hp.
K

159/0s and the originally Trans-pennine Express 158s are 400hp Cummins, 159/1s are 350hp Cummins, and the remaining 158s are a mixture of 350hp Cummins and 350hp Perkins.

 

[Llama]

If I am not mistaken, the ex-TPE sets are all 350hp

 

[anamyd]

If I am not mistaken, the ex-TPE sets are all 350hp

OK then My main point about the 159/1s only being 350hp but the 159/0s being 400hp still stands, however.

 

[hexagon789]

"158/8" doesn't exist. 158-7xx and 158-8xx are 158/0, and 158-9xx are 158/9.

Indeed, my mistake.

Amended my original post to correct that.

 

[MarkyT]

I remember once getting a 153 from Newark Northgate non-stop to Lincoln. It still seemed to be accelerating right up to the point at which it had to brake for the curves approaching Lincoln!

 

[anamyd]

Indeed, my mistake.

Amended my original post to correct that.

I believe it's because the Sprinter family all use the same format for vehicle numbers

 

[anamyd]

I remember once getting a 153 from Newark Northgate non-stop to Lincoln. It still seemed to be accelerating right up to the point at which it had to brake for the curves approaching Lincoln!

153s do have the lowest power to weight ratio of all members of the Sprinter family, due to the extra weight added by the doubling up of cabs and several mechanical systems, yet still "only" powered by the 286hp version of the 14L Cummins.

 

[hexagon789]

I believe it's because the Sprinter family all use the same format for vehicle numbers

No idea tbh, but I should have known that a 1588xx is a 158/0 not a 158/8. Think I was getting mixed up with 158/9s!

 

[hexagon789]

153s do have the lowest power to weight ratio of all members of the Sprinter family, due to the extra weight added by the doubling up of cabs and several mechanical systems, yet still "only" powered by the 286hp version of the 14L Cummins.

Considering the nature of the services they operate; they could've done with re-fitting with at least 350hp engines. Even then, I doubt performance would be anything approaching "sprightly". So much for being a "Sprinter"!

 

[anamyd]

Considering the nature of the services they operate; they could've done with re-fitting with at least 350hp engines. Even then, I doubt performance would be anything approaching "sprightly". So much for being a "Sprinter"!

yes, I was thinking of the 350hp version, which could have been swapped at conversion as the 158s existed by then (1991), but British Rail just probably weren't thinking like that; more about saving money I'm guessing. The "Sprinter" name was originally relative to first generation DMUs. When the 150s were introduced, British Rail actually made the timetable times faster.

 

[anamyd]

No idea tbh, but I should have known that a 1588xx is a 158/0 not a 158/8. Think I was getting mixed up with 158/9s!

it's easily done. the 150s' unit numbers do follow their subclass numbers, probably because they're the original Sprinters, but 153/155/156 Super Sprinters and 158 Express Sprinters don't, otherwise the vehicle numbers (which follow the same format) would "clash"!

 

[hexagon789]

yes, I was thinking of the 350hp version, which could have been swapped at conversion as the 158s existed by then (1991), but British Rail just probably weren't thinking like that; more about saving money I'm guessing.

Well the very basis for creating the 153s was to save money by creating single-car units for quieter routes without purchasing new units. Originally they were going to convert 156s.

Now many are slated to be converted back to 155s I believe. Regardless, they are terrible on accelerating and the brake release is apparently quite slow as well.

 

[hexagon789]

it's easily done. the 150s' unit numbers do follow their subclass numbers, probably because they're the original Sprinters, but 153/155/156 Super Sprinters and 158 Express Sprinters don't, otherwise the vehicle numbers (which follow the same format) would "clash"!

Do 156s even have subclasses?

 

[anamyd]

Well the very basis for creating the 153s was to save money by creating single-car units for quieter routes without purchasing new units. Originally they were going to convert 156s.

Now many are slated to be converted back to 155s I believe. Regardless, they are terrible on accelerating and the brake release is apparently quite slow as well.

Very true! Yes, I read about the proposed "152s". I'm not sure about conversion back to 155s. Supposedly Transport for Wales are going to be PRM modifying their what-will-be 13 153s. Other operators' 153s may well be converted back to 155s. The brake release can apparently be made quicker by cleaning a choke which serves no purpose apparently.

 

[anamyd]

Do 156s even have subclasses?

No they don't, but their unit numbers are 4xx (and 158/0s 7xx and 8xx and 155s/153s 3xx) to avoid the vehicle numbers conflicting with those of the original Class 150 Sprinters, as they use the same format What I meant was not the 153s/155s/156s having subclasses, but rather them not being unit numbered as 0xx/1xx/2xx!

 

[hexagon789]

Very true! Yes, I read about the proposed "152s". I'm not sure about conversion back to 155s. Supposedly Transport for Wales are going to be PRM modifying their what-will-be 13 153s. Other operators' 153s may well be converted back to 155s. The brake release can apparently be made quicker by cleaning a choke which serves no purpose apparently.

I'm sure I read that some operators were going to re-form their 153s as 155s so that only half a unit needed the full PRM mods.

Do TfW have routes which demand only a single 153 then? Which will have even less capacity after PRM modding.

 

[hexagon789]

No they don't, but their unit numbers are 4xx (and 158/0s 7xx and 8xx and 155s/153s 3xx) to avoid the vehicle numbers conflicting with those of the original Class 150 Sprinters, as they use the same format

So that's why it's arranged like that! It always seemed rather higgledy-piggledy.

 

[anamyd]

So that's why it's arranged like that! It always seemed rather higgledy-piggledy.

Yes

 

[anamyd]

I'm sure I read that some operators were going to re-form their 153s as 155s so that only half a unit needed the full PRM mods.

Do TfW have routes which demand only a single 153 then? Which will have even less capacity after PRM modding.

I believe that all vehicles of a unit have to be PRM modified for the unit to be PRM compliant.

Even though TfW will be keeping their 153s as 153s (they will be withdrawn in 2023), I'm sure they'll be doubling them up, especially as they will have more of them to play with within the next couple of weeks with the GWR transfer.

 

[hexagon789]

I believe that all vehicles of a unit have to be PRM modified for the unit to be PRM compliant.

But couldn't they get away with having only one modified disabled toilet in a reformed 155?

 

[anamyd]

But couldn't they get away with having only one modified disabled toilet in a reformed 155?

Yes absolutely, but that's a permanently reformed and reclassified 155, not two 153s externally coupled together, which isn't the same thing

 

[anamyd]

Sprinter acceleration differences, people!

Does anyone know if TfW 158-834 (the Voith DIWARail unit) has different acceleration to other 158s...? I was on it recently but couldn't tell a difference, so it would be a subtle difference we'd be talking about.

 

[hexagon789]

Sprinter acceleration differences, people!

Does anyone know if TfW 158-834 (the Voith DIWARail unit) has different acceleration to other 158s...? I was on it recently but couldn't tell a difference, so it would be a subtle difference we'd be talking about.

It's supposed to accelerate faster at lower speeds I think.

 

[Jozhua]

Does anyone know the 0-60 of a pacer?

I don't know if they're that powerful, but that bus body can't weigh much and they only have 4 wheels ;]

 

[MarkyT]

Does anyone know the 0-60 of a pacer?

I don't know if they're that powerful, but that bus body can't weigh much and they only have 4 wheels ;]

My experience in Devon is they seem to perform better than sprinters on local stopping services. I believe standard sprinter timings are used for local diagrams, as either class can turn up on any particular trains and sometimes they work in mixed formations. The pacers when working alone generally arrive early at each station. According to wikipedia class 143 cars weigh 24t for the DMS, and 24.5t for the DMSL, each equipped with a 230 hp (170 kW) Cummins engine. That's a much better power to weight ratio than other contemporary units.

 

[hexagon789]

Does anyone know the 0-60 of a pacer?

I don't know if they're that powerful, but that bus body can't weigh much and they only have 4 wheels ;]

144 - 115 secs
142 - 115 secs
143 - 117 secs

 

[Esker-pades]

144 - 115 secs
142 - 115 secs
143 - 117 secs

Why the additional 2 seconds for the 143?

 

[hexagon789]

Why the additional 2 seconds for the 143?

Lord knows! The 142 was a double unit, the 144 and 143 single units.

Probably just driving techniques or the healthiness of the units. In all likelihood they are nigh-on identical on average Pacers.

 

[anamyd]

Does anyone know the 0-60 of a pacer?

I don't know if they're that powerful, but that bus body can't weigh much and they only have 4 wheels ;]

only having 4 wheels per vehicle improves traction?!