Favourite Tube Stock (Past and/or Present)?

[Strathclyder]

Am starting this thread primarily as something of a counterbalance to the Worst Tube Line thread, this is a question that's entirely original and totally hasn't been asked umpteen times already. A bastion of originality, I am lol

Bascially what it says in the title. Of course, subsurface and tube stock are both eligible. You can nominate a specific stock for any reason: external aesthetic design, interior design/comfort, aural ambience/specific sounds, technological advancements they represented and so on.

Just to throw a few of my own picks out there (most likely to either be torn to shreds or be met by 'such a predicitable choice' lol):

Tube

Standard/1923 stock (the motor coaches have always had a soft spot for as I've a soft spot for early EMUs in general)
1938 stock (Art Deco in Tube train form, need I say more?)
1956/1959/1962 stock
1960 stock
1967/1972/1973 stock
1983 stock (primarily because failures are just as fascinating as successes imo, if not more so)
1986 stock (prototypes are just inherently fascinating)
1992 stock (likely the choice I'm gonna get pulled up on the most, but I've always had a soft spot for the 92 stock's aesthetics, not to mention the original traction motor sounds)
1996 stock (gonna be honest, the 96 stock's traction motor sounds are the main reason they're getting in here at all lol)

Sub-Surface

O/P stock
A stock
C stock
D stock

 

[Basil Jet]

1992 stock (likely the choice I'm gonna get pulled up on the most, but I've always had a soft spot for the 92 stock's aesthetics, not to mention the original traction motor sounds)

1992ts are my favourites because in the open air sections you can sit and throw back your head and see the clouds above you.

1992ts are my favourites because in the open air sections you can sit and throw back your head and see the clouds above you.

Sorry, non-Londoners may have found that unnecessarily enigmatic... I should have said that the 1992ts have large windows that curve over onto the roof.

 

[Jonah Kemp]

1972 for me

 

[Peter Mugridge]

For the Tube: 1938 Stock for me, with the 1923 a very close second.

For the sub-surface: A Stock, but i suspect that had I been a few years older it would be CO/CP Stock - which I can vaguely remember riding on as a young boy, but they had all gone before I started getting into railways.

 

[Gloster]

For me CO/CP stock is associated with exciting trips up to London as a small boy. 1938 stock was frequently used when I first went up to London on my own as a teenager.

 

[bramling]

Am starting this thread primarily as something of a counterbalance to the Worst Tube Line thread, this is a question that's entirely original and totally hasn't been asked umpteen times already. A bastion of originality, I am lol

Bascially what it says in the title. Of course, subsurface and tube stock are both eligible. You can nominate a specific stock for any reason: external aesthetic design, interior design/comfort, aural ambience/specific sounds, technological advancements they represented and so on.

Just to throw a few of my own picks out there (most likely to either be torn to shreds or be met by 'such a predicitable choice' lol):

Tube

Standard/1923 stock (the motor coaches have always had a soft spot for as I've a soft spot for early EMUs in general)
1938 stock (Art Deco in Tube train form, need I say more?)
1956/1959/1962 stock
1967/1972/1973 stock
1983 stock (primarily because failures are just as fascinating than successes imo, if not more so)
1986 stock (prototypes are just inherently fascinating)
1992 stock (likely the choice I'm gonna get pulled up on the most, but I've always had a soft spot for the 92 stock's aesthetics, not to mention the original traction motor sounds)
1996 stock (gonna be honest, the 96 stock's traction motor sounds are the main reason they're getting in here at all lol)

Subsurface

O/P stock
A stock
C stock
D stock

I’m going to be a maverick and say that I like them all in their own ways, though I have to admit I do have to try quite hard with S stock, and I’ll probably have to try several orders of magnitude harder with the new Piccadilly trains.

Favourite is probably 62 stock though. The unpainted exterior combined with the light grey interior, wooden floor and red/black/grey moquette really worked well for me, especially when in good condition, and seemed to go hand-in-hand with the more “rural” parts of Essex that the Central Line serves, or served in the case of Ongar.

The 62 stock always seemed to be slight better presented than the similar Northern Line trains. I was quite sad when the 62 stock finished on the Central Line, especially as they went a little prematurely, though a handful lasted a bit longer on the Northern Line.

I so wish travelling back in time was possible.

 

[334033]

For me my favourites are:
1992 Stock - I've always had a massive soft spot for them, mainly because I like their traction motors
1996 Stock - Always loved them
1995 Stock - Used to not like them but the stock grew on me a lot, now one of my favourites
1972 Stock - Vintage London Underground trains, and they're the only deep-level tube train with transverse seating. Makes the journey that more enjoyable
D Stock - I used to HATE these trains but over time I came to love them, they've been gone for years and it STILL feels wrong not seeing them on the District line

 

[Revaulx]

As a child in the 1960s I loved the 1938 stock and, once it arrived, the Victoria Line stock. One was elegant, cosy and ultra-comfortable; the other felt excitingly modern. I hated the stuff that came between (‘59 and ‘62 presumably); not sure why.

The R stock and its contemporary variants was great as well, with its flared bottoms. The C and D stock felt cheap and shoddy by comparison. I seem to be one of the few that think the S stock is an improvement!

 

[Dstock7080]

R Stock, which is not included in the list in first post, was withdrawn 40 years ago this month and were great trains to work with. Great sounds and smells!
Only spoiled by the few units painted grey, with red/grey/black moquette as an experiment to ‘improve’ their interior.

 

[Snow1964]

Alas I am too young to have ever traveled on the Metropolitan line when it still had Pullman cars.

Mine has to be either the 1938 tube stock, or the 1959 & 1962 stock, comfortable, functional and always felt like proper tube trains, unlike the modern ones that feel more like any rapid transit system.

Never really liked the orange and brown end panels of 1983 or D stock

 

[CBlue]

It's not liked by a lot of people, but travelling on the 1992 stock brings back a lot of memories of visiting London with my folks - it was always how we'd get into London. Nice big windows for the open-air sections, and that rather nice DC motor sound...plus a pretty impressive pace!

2009 stock gets my vote for a similar reason - the speed they can happily travel at is impressive, and they aren't too bad a ride either.

S stock is okay, and definitely an improvement over D stock with its cramped doorways.

 

[Mikey C]

Favourites, 1938, A, D, S, 1995. 1938s are an icon, the A stock were incredibly good for their era, the D stock stylish inside especially after their refurbishment, the S stock a really well designed train with a lovely view out of the S8 out in the sticks, while the 1995s are a well designed tube stock, more comfortable than the 1992s and with tip up seats instead of the silly perch seats of the 1996s.

Honourable mention to the 2009 for the much appreciated extra headroom.

 

[Enthusiast]

Sub-surface: "F" Stock, without a doubt. Slab sided with those big oval windows. A60/62 close runners up.

Tube: 1938, closely followed by the Craven 1960 stock.

 

[bramling]

Favourites, 1938, A, D, S, 1995. 1938s are an icon, the A stock were incredibly good for their era, the D stock stylish inside especially after their refurbishment, the S stock a really well designed train with a lovely view out of the S8 out in the sticks, while the 1995s are a well designed tube stock, more comfortable than the 1992s and with tip up seats instead of the silly perch seats of the 1996s.

Honourable mention to the 2009 for the much appreciated extra headroom.

Certainly worth emphasising the 95 stock. Being the last of the three 90s stocks they are quite well refined, even compared to the similar 96 stock. Likewise the arrangement where the manufacturer owns and maintains the trains seems to have worked well, it’s quite plain to see that they’re maintained to a rather better standard than both the Central and Jubilee fleets. They are ultra reliable too, not just from the point of view of having good miles-per-casualty figures, but when issues do arise it is exceptionally rare for the train to sit down totally - they will pretty much always be able to be limped out the way.

The Jubilee 96 stock has behaved reasonably well until recently, but is now starting to give problems. It hasn’t helped that the fleet has been quite heavily stretched for some years now, in essence there aren’t quite enough of them for the frequency of service the line is now expected to deliver. For various reasons more trains now run all the way to/from Stanmore or Stratford, and this hasn’t helped.

 

[Strathclyder]

I’m going to be a maverick and say that I like them all in their own ways, though I have to admit I do have to try quite hard with S stock, and I’ll probably have to try several orders of magnitude harder with the new Piccadilly trains.

Favourite is probably 62 stock though. The unpainted exterior combined with the light grey interior, wooden floor and red/black/grey moquette really worked well for me, especially when in good condition, and seemed to go hand-in-hand with the more “rural” parts of Essex that the Central Line serves, or served in the case of Ongar.

The 62 stock always seemed to be slight better presented than the similar Northern Line trains. I was quite sad when the 62 stock finished on the Central Line, especially as they went a little prematurely, though a handful lasted a bit longer on the Northern Line.

I so wish travelling back in time was possible.

Indeed, they're among my favourite tube stock for those reasons (combined with the sounds of the LT112 traction motors, electrical equipment and the doors clattering open/shut etc). The last 62 stock unit was withdrawn from the Northern Line on 11th November 1999 while the last 59 stock unit was retired on 27th January 2000; the excellent Squarewheels.org site has more info on it's 59 stock page.

In lieu of a TARDIS, this video125co video (recorded in 1992) is perhaps the best we have when it comes to reliving the 62 stock on the Central Line. For the time it was filmed, the video and sound quality is exceptional.

 

[Tangent]

Another vote for the 1959 Stock. That's the first stock I remember travelling on. Certainly, they suffered from being associated with the dirty, dingy LU decades of the 70s and 80s, but I did enjoy them.

For the SSL, A stock is the clear winner, despite the rough riding they could give towards the end of their lifespan.

 

[bramling]

Indeed, they're among my favourite tube stock for those reasons (combined with the sounds of the LT112 traction motors, electrical equipment and the doors clattering open/shut etc). The last 62 stock unit was withdrawn from the Northern Line on 11th November 1999; the last 59 stock unit was retired on 27th January 2000; the excellent Squarewheels.org site has more info on it's 59 stock page.

In lieu of a TARDIS, this video125co video (recorded in 1992) is perhaps the best we have when it comes to reliving the 62 stock on the Central Line. For the time it was filmed, the video and sound quality is exceptional.

Cracking stuff for sure. And it’s interesting that this footage gives the impression everything ran like clockwork in those days. The passengers seem so much more civilised too.

 

[Taunton]

The Jubilee 96 stock has behaved reasonably well until recently, but is now starting to give problems. It hasn’t helped that the fleet has been quite heavily stretched for some years now, in essence there aren’t quite enough of them for the frequency of service the line is now expected to deliver. For various reasons more trains now run all the way to/from Stanmore or Stratford, and this hasn’t helped.

In passing, is there any reason for this? I have noticed the same myself, despite the current shortage of trains and extended intervals, and a perception that it's not at all busy at the western end.

 

[Strathclyder]

Cracking stuff for sure. And it’s interesting that this footage gives the impression everything ran like clockwork in those days.

Certainly the impression one gets, even though it no doubt wasn't!

 

[bramling]

In passing, is there any reason for this? I have noticed the same myself, despite the current shortage of trains and extended intervals, and a perception that it's not at all busy at the western end.

My guesses are a combination of:

* Natural ageing process
* Not been as well maintained over the years as the 95 stock, which has the fairly rigid Alstom contract to underpin everything. Alstom has the ability to make serious £ there, but to do so they have to deliver
* Fleet stretched simply due to not enough trains, so less opportunity for maintenance
* Design is less mature than the 95 stock
* Fleet has always been slightly more stretched than the 95 stock, which had a fairly leisurely life for their first 15 years or so
* Covid, which has had a negative effect on LU reliability across the board, but the Jubilee seems to have been particularly hard hit for whatever reason

In terms of trains running to Stanmore and Stratford. In the case of Stratford it’s simply passenger demand requiring as many trains as possible to run there, plus there’s a crew depot there. For the Stanmore end it is more that all the intermediate reversing locations are sidings which require a physical detrainment plus slow-speed entry/exit to the sidings themselves, both of which castigate the line’s overall throughput. Also if the regular timetable makes use of all your convenient reversing facilities, recovery from disruption becomes very difficult indeed because all the options and boltholes are already being used.

Unfortunately, despite being a fairly simple line on paper, the Jubilee is something of a nuisance to operate. Whilst a lot of effort was made on making the JLE stations capacious, it seems less thought was put into designing the line as a whole. Hence operationally it’s something of a mess. Add in that there aren’t quite enough trains, and it all conspires negatively. Hence one outcome is the fleet is now showing signs of strain.

 

[Mikey C]

My guesses are a combination of:

* Natural ageing process
* Not been as well maintained over the years as the 95 stock, which has the fairly rigid Alstom contract to underpin everything. Alstom has the ability to make serious £ there, but to do so they have to deliver
* Fleet stretched simply due to not enough trains, so less opportunity for maintenance
* Design is less mature than the 95 stock
* Fleet has always been slightly more stretched than the 95 stock, which had a fairly leisurely life for their first 15 years or so
* Covid, which has had a negative effect on LU reliability across the board, but the Jubilee seems to have been particularly hard hit for whatever reason

In terms of trains running to Stanmore and Stratford. In the case of Stratford it’s simply passenger demand requiring as many trains as possible to run there, plus there’s a crew depot there. For the Stanmore end it is more that all the intermediate reversing locations are sidings which require a physical detrainment plus slow-speed entry/exit to the sidings themselves, both of which castigate the line’s overall throughput. Also if the regular timetable makes use of all your convenient reversing facilities, recovery from disruption becomes very difficult indeed because all the options and boltholes are already being used.

Unfortunately, despite being a fairly simple line on paper, the Jubilee is something of a nuisance to operate. Whilst a lot of effort was made on making the JLE stations capacious, it seems less thought was put into designing the line as a whole. Hence operationally it’s something of a mess. Add in that there aren’t quite enough trains, and it all conspires negatively. Hence one outcome is the fleet is now showing signs of strain.

The 96s have an older type of traction equipment, similar to that on the Networkers, which I assume is more problematic

 

[contrex]

My favourites:

Tube: Standard stock. First encountered and ridden aged 13 in summer 1965 on the Northern City line. Great fun in the motor cars. I can still remember the sound of the contactors. Caught up with them again on the IOW in the 1980s. Always used to hunt out the Standard trailers that ran with 1938 stock on the Bakerloo.

Sub-surface: District Line M & N (Q35 stock). For exterior looks and interior decor. Seen very often on the District during my teens.

In the summer holidays of 1963 and 64 I used to buy BR Southern Region Rail Rovers on several Saturdays and when they were discontinued for 1965 I switched to LT Twin Rovers.

 

[Enthusiast]

Tube: Standard stock. First encountered and ridden aged 13 in summer 1965 on the Northern City line. Great fun in the motor cars. I can still remember the sound of the contactors.

I recall Standard stock on the NC line. I used Essex Road station quite a lot. I recall the platform lights dimming as the southbound train left Highbury & Islington and the lights in the train dimming as the train accelerated. Two car sets (Driving motor car + Control Trailer) off peak as I recall.

 

[FormerBritInMe]

At age 5 (1955) a trip with my parents to see relatives near Waterloo which involved probably CO/CP stock on the District Line and 1938 stock on the Northern Line, made those my favorites. A later trip in 1971 I was able to catch a CO/CP ride although by then the C stock had mostly taken over.

For today's Underground, probably the classic 1972 stock on the Bakerloo, or the S stock (yes even though they are modern and electronic)

 

[Dstock7080]

At age 5 (1955) a trip with my parents to see relatives near Waterloo which involved probably CO/CP stock on the District Line and 1938 stock on the Northern Line, made those my favourites

In 1955 a District journey would’ve been on Q or R Stock, O and P Stock were still allocated on the Metropolitan Line.

 

[Intercity110]

Would the met railway electric loco ‘sarah siddons’ and the 4tc that it hauled count? As i quite like the livery.

 

[stuu]

A Stock

Especially when empty and the driver is not hanging about, the springy seats meant you could get airborne at Neasden

 

[Mikey C]

A Stock

Especially when empty and the driver is not hanging about, the springy seats meant you could get airborne at Neasden

I used to love the fast trains from Finchley Road to Harrow, great fun!

 

[LOL The Irony]

The 96 Stock has to take it for me.

 

[Tester]

I used to love the fast trains from Finchley Road to Harrow, great fun!

Go back further and there were peak hour fast trains from Finchley Road to Rickmansworth!

In the early 70s I lived next to the the railway just west of Harrow on the Hill station - they were fun to watch coming through on the line nearest to me (Down Marylebone - aka Platform 1).

Steam too then on engineering trains - ex GWR pannier tanks. Can I count them?!