Least favourite stock

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ivo

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2010
Messages
7,307
Location
Bath (or Southend)
In relation to a recent thread about our preferred choices of stock (here), everyone knows my answer to the opposite statement would be 323, for about a zillion different reasons - almost all of which get countered by almost every other person on here.

Never mind me though. What about everyone else? What stock do you not like to travel on? Ideally besides Pacers and Voyagers?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

junglejames

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2010
Messages
2,069
In relation to a recent thread about our preferred choices of stock (here), everyone knows my answer to the opposite statement would be 323, for about a zillion different reasons - almost all of which get countered by almost every other person on here.

Never mind me though. What about everyone else? What stock do you not like to travel on? Ideally besides Pacers and Voyagers?
You dont like the 323s? I never realised;)

Dont worry, I have no wish to say Pacers. Quality units! Dont want to say voyagers either. Can suffer them for a certain length. Its Pendys for me. In standard class I cant stand them. Its purely an internal thing though.
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
5,049
1. Trains where the ride is too rough, especially Pacers on all but the best track. Tram rather than rail, but some of the Metrolink stock gave pretty awful rides before the Bury line was relaid.
2. Trains with too few seats to meet typical off-peak passenger demand - that covers most single car and 2 car dmu's used on routes serving large cities.
3. Trains with inadequate legroom between seats. Some Class 153 seating comes into this category.
4. Trains that get overheated in summer, usually due to unreliable air-con. The diminishing number of trains with passenger controlled windows is a matter of personal regret.
 

Lampshade

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2009
Messages
3,574
Location
South London
Can't understand why anyone would hate 323s, as an all round unit they're probably third or fourth best in the country.

Anyway, my least favourite stock? Anything that isn't a 458 <:D

Being serious, I'd say 150s.
 

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
(1) class 321. decent ride quality and reasonably fast, but dreadful seats
(2) class 319. (not quite as bad seats, but otherwise, rather spartan and not really suited for journeys of perhaps 2 hours or so).
Other than that, they all have their merits, and their demerits (the much maligned Pacers are excellent for sightseeing, the almost as maligned Voyageurs have excellent peformance, the sometimes maligned 450s actually offer bags of space if you get the 3-a-side seats outside of the rush hour).
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
8,398
Location
Somewhere, not in London
<controversial> I don't like HSTs, simply because uninformed people keep harping on about how they can be converted or re-engineered without realising how OLD they are!</controversial>

I don't really have any disliked stock, just stock that's inappropriate or too short, 220/1s 185s, or should have long since been retired, pacers.
 

Ivo

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2010
Messages
7,307
Location
Bath (or Southend)
This is what you get growing up in a EMU and Electric Region!
I grew up in Juice Land, and find that diesels tend to have more "life" to them - as though you can feel them working! Electrics are just like clocks in that sense - they just do round and round lifelessly (except for the *cough* hopeless *cough* examples such as 323s <D) without us being able to appreciate the journey anywhere near as much.

Put it this way - if I lived in Colchester I would be in Sudbury and Ipswich a Hell of a lot. And I'm not even that keen on Sprinters!

I wouldn't say I hate any class of train, but my least liked are probably 170s / 171s, 321s and 390s.
The highlighted class is second-bottom on my list <D
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
8,398
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Same, im not a big fan of any DMU and HST's - i particular hate Pacers!
Im fine with diesel locomotives on the whole :lol:

This is what you get growing up in a EMU and Electric Region!
Don't go taking that out of context, I really like the HSTs, it's just people on here harping on about re-engineering them into something they where never designed to be that gets on my ****...
 

TrainBoy98

Member
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Messages
375
Location
Worthing
I myself dis-like the new S-Stock but i dont hate any train. Even 323s probably have an upside dont they Ivo? For example, even tho i dont like the s stock, i like the internal walkways. Name any class/stock and ill give you an upside and a downside to it.
 

W-on-Sea

Member
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
1,136
321s. Not a pleasure to travel on. Too hot or too cold, horrid seats and seating layout, and really quite characterless.

165s/166s are far from delightful, too. All of the above, and noisy too!
 

trentside

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
14 Aug 2010
Messages
3,310
Location
The back cab
I'm in agreement that 153s can be pretty horrendous. Depending on the operator and seating type, leg room can be very variable - not helped by how crowded they can get when used on busy services.

I'm not a big fan of the 365s either. I did a return journey from Peterborough to Hitchin recently and found them very uncomfortable to travel on.
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
I'll second trentside on 365s. I would love travel from Kings Cross to Peterborough on FCC instead of EC just to do something different and enjoy the scenery (yes I call it scenery!) north of Hitchin more; but the notion of it being a 321 or 365 puts me right off. I did Kings Lynn once from Kings Cross on a 365. Beautiful countryside, however probably the most unsuitable rolling stock I could imagine (within reason) for it - I think a 375 / 377 or 444 would be perfect for the Peterborough / Kings Lynn runs on the Great Northern, but never a 365 or similar. I think the maximum time I can stand to be on one is on the ~45min Cambridge Cruisers from Kings Cross.
 

yummy125

Member
Joined
2 Oct 2010
Messages
243
Not keen on Class 220, 150, 158, 159 as they are all "Thrash & takes ages to get going". :D

All Diesel classes are great esp with their "Silencers" removed. :p
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
4,305
Location
Nottingham
170's they shouldnt be used on cross coutnry routes. In most cases XC could do better with a 158

That said, a 172 bodyshell with the doors at the end could be good
 

2Dogbox

Member
Joined
22 Mar 2011
Messages
174
Location
Lincoln
From a passenger point of view the legroom on 153/156's is quite dreadful. I am not exactly tall but find I have to sort of straddle my legs to one side to fit in a dogbox seat!

As a guard both the 153/156's become my favourites and my least favourite is the 158. Horrible narrow isles on our EMT 158's which involves walking like a crab when doing tickets and occasionally standing on a passengers foot, also they are stuffy due to poor air-con.

I never really liked working 170s either, very cramped cabs and swivel seat to get round when a platform was on the 'other' side.
 

SprinterMan

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2010
Messages
2,340
Location
Hertford
378s are not trains, they are hallways with benches in them that seem to move all by themselves...
321s are dreadful, esp. GA's green-seated 321s.
Aside from Northern's FNW refreshed 150s, 150s aren't great.
170s are fine when all the interior pannels are tightly bolted down, but when I get a rattly one (NXEA, LM) it actually causes me physical pain (I think I had an ear infection or something).

Adam :D
 

RyanB

Member
Joined
20 May 2011
Messages
140
Location
Edinburgh, UK
320s - Fortunately I have only once had the 'pleasure' of riding on one of these horrid machines due to Engineering works one Sunday preventing Falkirk High line trains serving Haymarket. Seats were dreadfully uncomfortable, noisy and looked bland and uninspiring both inside and out (SPT Livery). Most certainly not designed for long journeys.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
7,516
Location
Central Belt
320s - Fortunately I have only once had the 'pleasure' of riding on one of these horrid machines due to Engineering works one Sunday preventing Falkirk High line trains serving Haymarket. Seats were dreadfully uncomfortable, noisy and looked bland and uninspiring both inside and out (SPT Livery). Most certainly not designed for long journeys.
? - why would engineering work in the Edinburgh area force you onto a 320. I didn't think they had ever gone to Edinburgh in passenger use. Did you mean the 322?
 

G_A_C_C_C

Member
Joined
11 Dec 2008
Messages
113
Location
High Wycombe
I always hated 115s. Through the 80s I just couldn't get them - the ME allocated ones were the only gap in my book.....then I moved to High Wycombe and all I saw were 115s!
 

Tracked

Member
Joined
30 May 2011
Messages
934
Location
53.5440°N 1.1510°W
Pacers - yeah, well ... these would be the ones that nothing much can be done to improve them, other than their use in a giant game of conkers

153's would be better with more legroom, I've been on a few of them recently & not having the longest of legs still found the lack of space annoying (the whole Shrewsbury-Cardiff Heart of Wales line last year more so).

220/1's - usually too crowded & anywhere near the toilet is usually too smelly, on the odd occasions when they've been quiet & not as smelly they're ok. This is rare.

321 - really don't get the hate for these, other than after 20 years of use on the local Doncaster-Leeds services they're a bit boring.

350's - Dear London Midland, please get some proper seats, don't just put a bit of cloth over the seat frame, it's not very comfortable
 

Robinson

Member
Joined
1 Aug 2010
Messages
623
Location
Helensburgh
My nominations:

150s: The Northern units I've been on vibrate horribly even when the train is braking/not moving. The ATW units I've been on had a chronic lack of legroom.

185s: Too short, too loud, not very comfortable - a huge backward step from the Voyagers when they were introduced on Manchester-Scotland services.

319s: Seem to always have damage/graffiti whenever I've been on them.

Also, I'm not really a fan of the 465s...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top