Favourite ScotRail class of EMU?

[Scotrail12]

I'm bored so have decided to do this poll. All opinions welcome, from enthusiasts to railway workers. Would definitely be interested to see what drivers think of them (I don't have much technical knowledge).

I've included 314's in the poll since they were in service until fairly recently.

For me, I would say the 334's. Took them occasionally on Ayr and Argyle Line services back in the day and was thrilled when I found out that they were coming to my line full-time for the Edinburgh services (as opposed to 1 or 2 diagrams before). Nicely laid out, an enjoyable ride and don't seem to be showing their age much. It's been 10 years since they moved to the North Clyde routes, so I would be interested to see how they would do on other lines and would love to see them back at Central High Level again. I will say that I preferred them in Carmine and Cream, don't think that Saltire looks good on them.

Really, the only bad ones since the 314's left are the 320/4's, hate those ones with a passion since they have a bad PA system, no plug sockets, no character at all and fairly low seats. Whilst they are DMU's and not part of the pol, also not fond of the 156's used to East Kilbride (took a trip on the EK line shortly before lockdown and it was terrible, thought it would be bad but was even worse than expected). Time for them to follow 314's out to pasture and for the likes of EK & Barrhead to be electrified?

What are your thoughts?

 

[prod_pep]

It has to be the 314s for me. Not glamorous and fairly spartan internally but they did the job brilliantly on the Cathcart routes. I've always much preferred them to the 318s and 320s which I loathe due to their poor acceleration and terrible seating. If the 314s had received modern high-backed seating and a good quality PIS, I think they'd have been a lot more popular with the passengers. The 314s were always full of character but the 318/320 design is charmless to me.

I do agree that the 334s are nice trains and are preferable to the 380s which have a relatively poor ride quality and dreary interiors. The 385s improve the internal ambience over the 380s significantly and are excellent in my opinion.

 

[Scotrail12]

It has to be the 314s for me. Not glamorous and fairly spartan internally but they did the job brilliantly on the Cathcart routes. I've always much preferred them to the 318s and 320s which I loathe due to their poor acceleration and terrible seating. If the 314s had received modern high-backed seating and a good quality PIS, I think they'd have been a lot more popular with the passengers. The 314s were always full of character but the 318/320 design is charmless to me.

Agreed that 314's were excellent for Cathcart and probably should have been kept for that line (the other stock except for 320's just don't work there), but their problems were that they were appropriate in any way for the Inverclyde line and can definitely understand why they were loathed on those routes since they had basically no amenities at all - no tables, no PA, no plug sockets, no WiFi, no toilets, doors opened at every station, lack of heating, bad seats.

Decent for a short 10 minute journey to the South Side but otherwise inadequate, even a 30 minute journey via Maxwell Park to Newton was enough for me. East Kilbride and Whifflet dodged a bullet there as 314's would have likely been used on EK if it had been electrified earlier and Whifflet would have no doubt got them if they didn't send them to the Low Level instead.

320's aren't particularly good but I do have a soft spot for the 320/3's since I grew up with those trains on the North Clyde (way before A2B opened). 318's are showing their age now but I actually like their seating, quite comfortable. Would have loved to have taken a 318 out to Ayrshire, I bet that would have been a great ride. They aren't suited to Cathcart IMO.

 

[507021]

The 314s, easily.

 

[matchmaker]

303s...

 

[dorsetdesiro]

Has to be the 385, it has that nice Desiro-like (350/444) ambience, if the ironing boards get exchanged for the 380's then even better!

It is in a way more "350-like" than the 380 as the 380 has the cold & sterile Desiro City standard which is ill suited and not comfortable for regional/express services, better placed for running Glasgow commuter stopping services.

I do like its gangway ends, the design is interesting like the unusually shaped windscreens (unhelpful, I know, because of previous safety concerns) like the 442s.

Gangwayed intercity stock (i.e. 442 then 444) is the norm on the SW network so it'd be cool to see possible future replacements, if these come from Hitachi, resembling like intercity versions of 385s - fused with AT300 bodies.

 

[306024]

303s...

Yes, none of the above. Always enjoyed the Glasgow blue trains on any trip north of the border.

 

[Scotrail12]

I'm too young to properly remember 303's. From looking at pictures, the view from the front of the train through the cab must have been really cool.

Yikes - 320's are really not getting any love on this poll. Any 320 fans out there or are they well and truly the weakest link of the fleet?

 

[scotraildriver]

From a drivers perspective 380 is a good train. For being relatively similar in design the 385 is quite appalling. The layout of the cab, the ergonomics, that shocking windscreen, poor heating, terrible wheelslip and loads more makes them a hard place to put in a shift.

 

[Mag_seven]

303s...

The unrefurbished version of course. Not forgetting the 311 as well.

 

[scotrail158713]

I went with the 380 purely for the noise they make when they start moving - can’t think of many nicer sounds.

 

[route101]

I went with the 380 purely for the noise they make when they start moving - can’t think of many nicer sounds.

The alarm sound?

 

[route101]

For comfort , the 380s , better seats than 385.
385s seem hollow when at speed.
320s , seating is low , not a fan of 3 - 2 facing seating .
318s feel low again but prefer them to 320s.
334s , seating ok , not a fan of all facing bays of 4 plus no table.
314s , basic , seating was not comfortable if you were on them for a while.

 

[route101]

318s and 320s have an inferior seating layout to 156s , yes the seats arent great om 156s .156s are here to stay for a while yet.

 

[hexagon789]

I liked 314s because they were my local units for 14 years and while spartan were not bad for the journeys involved.

For longer-distance I much preferred the 334s on Ayrshire workings, far more comfortable than the 380s which ride abysmally.

I also like the 318s, very smooth starting off but the seats are rather spartan as per 314s.

 

[lxfe_mxtterz]

For me, it'd probably have to be the Class 334s. The interior is pleasant and laid out nicely, and I've always found the seats comfortable. To top it off, they sound fantastic - especially in this video.

(Although, I do also really like the Class 385s!)

 

[djpontrack]

I would of voted for 303’s if they had been there but I went for 314’s as I loved going for a trip out on them when I was in the Glasgow area.

 

[pieguyrob]

I voted for the 380, because I like them. I have to agree with some of the other posts about the 303's. I travelled on a handful of them in the late 90's.

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

Voted 314 just because I liked exploring Glasgow on them. On anything other than short trips I imagine they were intolerable tho.

385s are the best to ride on, the seats are perfect if you're sitting up trying to get work done during your journey, but not the best if you're trying to relax.

I'm always travelling with a laptop so 380s and 334s with full tables would be really nice, but they always feel kinda cold and dreary, the 3-2 seating on the 334 can get cramped too.

Barely ever on 318s and 320s so can't comment much,

 

[computerSaysNo]

334s , seating ok , not a fan of all facing bays of 4 plus no table.

For me, it'd probably have to be the Class 334s. The interior is pleasant and laid out nicely, and I've always found the seats comfortable. To top it off, they sound fantastic - especially in this video.

I agree with all of these, in my opinion the only thing wrong with the 334s is the lack of any tables at all. For the journeys they make, I don't think the full size tables would be suitable though so I think the half size tables would be best.
Seats are very comfortable, especially if you sit in the 2+2 with armrests.
They could maybe do with slightly more airline seating; that said, I have never been unable to get a seat in the existing airline seats so maybe it is okay as it is.

 

[delt1c]

Has to be 303'3 in unrefurbished condition. I trip along the North Clyde to Helensburgh was great, comfortable, plus great view from front coach

 

[scotrail158713]

The alarm sound?

I want to say it’s the sound of the motor(?) - not 100% sure on the ins and outs of them though.
This sound (

)

 

[route101]

Voted 314 just because I liked exploring Glasgow on them. On anything other than short trips I imagine they were intolerable tho.

385s are the best to ride on, the seats are perfect if you're sitting up trying to get work done during your journey, but not the best if you're trying to relax.

I'm always travelling with a laptop so 380s and 334s with full tables would be really nice, but they always feel kinda cold and dreary, the 3-2 seating on the 334 can get cramped too.

Barely ever on 318s and 320s so can't comment much,

3 - 2 seating is in centre coach only. One thing ive noticed with the new seats on 385s and 156s on airline seats , is the table comes down low almost pressing on my legs.

As for tables , i think the 156 has tables like 158s in bays of 4 ,almost sitting very close to the person acorss from you .

 

[D365]

I want to say it’s the sound of the motor(?) - not 100% sure on the ins and outs of them though.
This sound

The inverter electronics - converts 750V DC to three phase AC for the motors.

 

[snookertam]

It has to be the 314s for me. Not glamorous and fairly spartan internally but they did the job brilliantly on the Cathcart routes. I've always much preferred them to the 318s and 320s which I loathe due to their poor acceleration and terrible seating. If the 314s had received modern high-backed seating and a good quality PIS, I think they'd have been a lot more popular with the passengers. The 314s were always full of character but the 318/320 design is charmless to me.

I do agree that the 334s are nice trains and are preferable to the 380s which have a relatively poor ride quality and dreary interiors. The 385s improve the internal ambience over the 380s significantly and are excellent in my opinion.

I actually went for the 380s as they are decent enough on the Cathcart routes and are quite versatile generally. But the 314s were far better suited for the line than the 318s or 320s. The main issue is the interior - they are not designed for high density inner suburban at all, and how they've lasted all these years on the North Clyde routes with that layout I'll never know.

The 380s at least have that extra standing space around the wider doors which make them more amenable to an inner suburban service, despite being designed for outer suburban/regional services (ie Inverclyde/Ayrshire). They were also supposed to be the Glasgow Airport Rail link units as well!

 

[Scotrail12]

I actually went for the 380s as they are decent enough on the Cathcart routes and are quite versatile generally. But the 314s were far better suited for the line than the 318s or 320s. The main issue is the interior - they are not designed for high density inner suburban at all, and how they've lasted all these years on the North Clyde routes with that layout I'll never know.

North Clyde is my local line - we've had 320's since 1990 and 318's since 2011. I don't think that they work badly on this route. Generally fairly empty on daytime services and more than enough seats during peak hours. 334's are generally more pleasant but that doesn't really matter on a 20 minute commute.

What lines would you say are best fit for the 318's and 320's?

 

[snookertam]

North Clyde is my local line - we've had 320's since 1990 and 318's since 2011. I don't think that they work badly on this route. Generally fairly empty on daytime services and more than enough seats during peak hours. 334's are generally more pleasant but that doesn't really matter on a 20 minute commute.

What lines would you say are best fit for the 318's and 320's?

I don't think they work on any heavily loaded routes due to the internal layout. Might not be so bad on the North Clyde routes as they are very frequent within the city itself, but on the Cathcart routes they are prone to crush loading due to the panelling around the doors and the 3+2 seating. This is also dreadful for people getting on with buggies, shopping etc and at the last refurbishment the opportunity should have been taken to modify them to be more suited to inner suburban routes. The 380s, despite clearly never being intended for it, manage to work the Neilston services very well.

I think if anything the 318/320s have too many seats for a route where the longest journey is just under 30 minutes - standing really isn't an issue on such a line. The 314s were ideal as the door areas were wider and had the single seat. The low backed seats were better as well - I don't agree with the need for high backed seats especially on the Cathcart and Paisley Canal routes, but accept that ScotRail are unlikely to have units devoted to these lines.

 

[SC318250]

318 are probably suited to Inverclyde routes with the 380s
I think they could last another 10years, and I think if Kilmarnock line could have been electrified earlier they could have run a few years on this line

 

[prod_pep]

I don't think they work on any heavily loaded routes due to the internal layout. Might not be so bad on the North Clyde routes as they are very frequent within the city itself, but on the Cathcart routes they are prone to crush loading due to the panelling around the doors and the 3+2 seating. This is also dreadful for people getting on with buggies, shopping etc and at the last refurbishment the opportunity should have been taken to modify them to be more suited to inner suburban routes. The 380s, despite clearly never being intended for it, manage to work the Neilston services very well.

I think if anything the 318/320s have too many seats for a route where the longest journey is just under 30 minutes - standing really isn't an issue on such a line. The 314s were ideal as the door areas were wider and had the single seat. The low backed seats were better as well - I don't agree with the need for high backed seats especially on the Cathcart and Paisley Canal routes, but accept that ScotRail are unlikely to have units devoted to these lines.

The problem with the 318/320 fleets is that while they have high-density 3+2 seating, they suffer with poor acceleration and too little vestibule space. The dismal acceleration but higher top speed would lend them to routes such as Ayrshire and Inverclyde, but these routes are long enough that passengers would expect more generous interiors nowadays. The 318/320 units have aged badly and their seating (especially the 320s) leaves a lot to be desired. The 334s are superior in just about every way.

In my opinion the 318s and 320s don't have a perfect fit route, whereas the 314s clearly did with the Cathcart and Paisley Canal services. They would have also been ideal for the East Kilbride and Barrhead routes should they have been electrified.

I've always liked the low-back bucket seating on PEP-derived EMUs (and the 455s) but they are generally disliked.

 

[Scotrail12]

the 314s clearly did with the Cathcart and Paisley Canal services. They would have also been ideal for the East Kilbride and Barrhead routes should they have been electrified.

I've always liked the low-back bucket seating on PEP-derived EMUs (and the 455s) but they are generally disliked.

Paisley Canal and Cathcart were good for 314's (Whifflet as well if that stayed High Level) but I couldn't have seen them being popular on EK given that it's a 30 minute journey and they are just too basic. Might have been plenty of standing space but that was probably the only advantage of them.