is it true that the 1995 stock have weak brakes?

[Tubefan2013]

I have heard a rumour that the 1995 stock brakes are quite weak. Is this true? I personally find the C77 and the 1972 stock seem to have the most powerful brakes.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

I personally find the C77 and the 1972 stock seem to have the most powerful brakes.

Before they improved the rheo C and 72 stock were woeful for braking (unless one shut off and run the key to reverse).

 

[Nym]

Before they improved the rheo C and 72 stock were woeful for braking (unless one shut off and run the key to reverse).

I can assure you theres a nice big handle in the cab that stops 72TS very quickly indeed

 

[bronzeonion]

They actually have one of the best on the LU network.

 

[Nym]

They actually have one of the best on the LU network.

Is certainly better than the brakes on the 1996TS, simply by power to weight on the dynamic braking, but the better traction systems on the 1995TS means better braking performance. But the 2009TS and S Stock do better the 90s AC stock IMO.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

I can assure you theres a nice big handle in the cab that stops 72TS very quickly indeed

The rheo was rubbish though, was better to use the Westinghouse or shut off and key to reverse before braking (after they sealed off the rheo cut out switch that is).

Motors dropping out while pulling away, erratic rheo while braking and they were an improvement on the 59s ?

 

[Tubefan2013]

The 1995 stock do have a better traction package than the 1996 stock. However On a coment on youtube a user said ( Probably driver) Said " Some drivers are frightened to go over 30mph, at this speed coming into stations there is a good chance of an overshoot"

True but maybe deceleration rates will improve under TBTC signaling?