Opinions on Class 80x trains vs HSTs?

[43096]

How come that one has that hybrid layout? Was it changed at some point?

Changed when 125 Group overhauled it. It better matches the requirements for the use it gets i.e. more groups/families travelling.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Changed when 125 Group overhauled it.

Ah.

 

[AM9]

Buffets - no, that's really not the case where long distance trains are concerned, and it very much is relevant to the overall experience. Prior to the appearance of the IEPs, pretty much everything had one, and I can't actually think of any other long-distance trains which don't, other than XC (where they were removed to try to make some impression on the severe lack of capacity caused by trains which are too short).

As regards the seats, they are important in the passenger experience, and those in the IEPs are considerably worse than those in the trains they replaced (which mostly had either Grammer or Primarius seating). And in this case, they realy are tied to the train type as all of them have them, and given that the trains are new the chances of them being replaced in the near future is very low.

Buffets have been in decline for as long as I've been travelling on trains. Many of the regional and medium distance trains running with MKI stock managed to support buffets (usually RMBs) even including the AM9s on a less than 70 mile journey from Liverpool St to Clacton! Then there were the Waterloo to Portsmouth (74m) and Weymouth (143m) services that had full buffets into the '80s. Since then, buffets have increasingly turned into trolley based offerings as costs vs revenue have changed plus the need to maximise capacity where that is under pressure.
Now it is the turn for inter-city services to get the treatment, e.g. Norwich, Bristol/South Wales, and when the HSTS are scrapped, the MML. Once the 390s are gone, their replacement will be trolley service, at least for standard class.
Virtually all of the main models of seats approved for rail use can be fitted to any train, so there is nothing about the Hitachi AT300 design that prevents seats from that range being specified by any customer. Comparing setas (which is as numerous threads here prove) purely a matter of personal taste, so it is pointless condemning a whole new class of trains based on the furniture it's owners or even lessors have chosen to put in it.

 

[DB]

Virtually all of the main models of seats approved for rail use can be fitted to any train, so there is nothing about the Hitachi AT300 design that prevents seats from that range being specified by any customer. Comparing setas (which is as numerous threads here prove) purely a matter of personal taste, so it is pointless condemning a whole new class of trains based on the furniture it's owners or even lessors have chosen to put in it.

I have seen it stated (and I think it was by Tony Miles from Modern Railways) that Hitachi would impose a high charge for varying the basic design to include different seats, hence they all have the same.

Afraid I really don't see your point in any case - whether or not different seats could be fitted is irrelevant - the reality is that the same seats are fitted to all IEP trains built so far. It also seems to be a widely-held view that they are uncomfortable, so if it's subjective then it's a view held by a lot of people. You cannot claim that seats don't matter, as clearly they do - it's one of the main reasons why Meridians are widely regarded as being better than Voyagers.

 

[AM9]

I have seen it stated (and I think it was by Tony Miles from Modern Railways) that Hitachi would impose a high charge for varying the basic design to include different seats, hence they all have the same. ...

Seats aren't part of the basic design. They are part of the production build standard. What they have got is sensible seat spacing, (which in itself gives complete flexibility of seat model choice) but the actual seats fitted in them must have been accepted by the DfT as part of the original large order. I'm not saying that it was or wasn't the correct choice, but you can be sure that they drove a hard bargain so Hitachi gave them what they were paying for.
Essentially, the trains do what they were ordered for. There will always be criticism of whatever seats they fitted, especially if considered in the wider world of all passengers rather than the seat pressure groups (pun intended) in RUK.

 

[Metal_gee_man]

The only way to have appeased the British public who wanted a loco hauled coaches but also the ability to run with electric was to have cobbled a more aerodynamic end onto a version of a class 88 loco and use Mark 5a coaches like the Nova 3 TPEs, it's would have been the best of both worlds, quiet diesel operation and a electric for under the wires!
I truly didn't fall in love with the HSTs, the squeaking, the manual doors, the toilets they were an analogue train in a digital era.
Equally I don't partically like the AT300s either as a class 395, class 80x they don't have amazing ride comfort, the seats and lights as have been said before on the 80xs aren't correct but generally they are an improvement on the HSTs.
So to summarise I think TPE did something kind of right with the Mark 5a but bodged the loco and should have made them diesel/electro class 88s rather than class 68s

 

[ValleyLines142]

I think you'll find plenty of people who disagree with you.

My grandparents, who were alive long before the HST entered service, and are most definitely not railway enthusiasts, speak very highly of them, and they say many others they know agree with them.

I really don't like diesel traction that much at all and would much rather be on an electric train. Honestly I found HSTs quite boring. But one has to respect that they have served their routes well for almost 50 years and still have life left in them on lower tier routes such as Crosscountry and intercity services in Scotland.

Sorry but I have to agree with @Purple Orange.

Whilst the HSTs are iconic and their legacy will continue for years to come, the seats were worse than the 800s I feel, they were noisy and the tables were at a ridiculously low level (I'm just shy of 6' 4" and my thighs barely fitted in the gap between the seat and the table). I actually thoroughly enjoy the acceleration of an 800, especially on electric, and when travelling from Temple Meads to Cardiff I will even get XC up to Parkway and get an 800 across to Cardiff as opposed to a 166 or a HST.

People don't like change basically, and people cannot adapt to new things. It'll be the same in 30/40 years time when the 800s are retiring and even newer trains will be introduced. 'Ooh but these new trains are awful and plastic-y compared to the 800s'.

 

[py_megapixel]

Sorry but I have to agree with @Purple Orange.

Whilst the HSTs are iconic and their legacy will continue for years to come, the seats were worse than the 800s I feel, they were noisy and the tables were at a ridiculously low level (I'm just shy of 6' 4" and my thighs barely fitted in the gap between the seat and the table). I actually thoroughly enjoy the acceleration of an 800, especially on electric, and when travelling from Temple Meads to Cardiff I will even get XC up to Parkway and get an 800 across to Cardiff as opposed to a 166 or a HST.

People don't like change basically, and people cannot adapt to new things. It'll be the same in 30/40 years time when the 800s are retiring and even newer trains will be introduced. 'Ooh but these new trains are awful and plastic-y compared to the 800s'.

Oh no, I do prefer the 800s to travel on. They clearly have better technology and the legroom is far better, as you say. And I have to agree with you about teh acceleration.
I just think that writing them off as bad trains from the start is wrong.

 

[DB]

Whilst the HSTs are iconic and their legacy will continue for years to come, the seats were worse than the 800s I feel

But which seats? There have been at least three different types fitted to HSTs.

I wold regards the Primarius ones, as fitted to LNER and XC HSTs, as probably the best modern seats.

 

[ValleyLines142]

But which seats? There have been at least three different types fitted to HSTs.

I wold regards the Primarius ones, as fitted to LNER and XC HSTs, as probably the best modern seats.

I'm not too familiar with the seat names, but the latest ones, as can be found on EMR's 158s.

If I could design a seat, it would be an IET seat, with the padding of a TFW 158, and the alignment of a 175.

 

[Ashley Hill]

In the transition period between HSTs and the annoying green crap that replaced them it was noticeable that many commuters stayed loyal to the HSTs. I saw many IETs leaving with seats to spare and I've left 5 mins later on a full and standing HST.
Many on here moan about the noise of the HST but this is unheard in the train,unlike the IET which is blairing away beneath your feet.
The toilet and door situation has been cured on XC HSTs and the 255s with retention tanks and power doors. How do the HST detractors feel about those?

 

[Energy]

The toilet and door situation has been cured on XC HSTs and the 255s with retention tanks and power doors. How do the HST detractors feel about those?

This happened when the HSTs were 40+ years old, they still spent the by far majority of their life dumping on the tracks and with manual doors.

 

[Ashley Hill]

This happened when the HSTs were 40+ years old, they still spent the by far majority of their life dumping on the tracks and with manual doors.

Most charter stock still does as do coaches on preserved lines.

 

[Energy]

Most charter stock still does as do coaches on preserved lines.

These aren't mainline stock though, one of them is spot hire which get used occasionally when an operator is short of stock and the other will have older stock as that is the appeal of them. There is a difference between a multi hour commuter train from London to Bristol (and further) and a short distance train for tourists which part of the appeal is the old style of it.

 

[Domh245]

The only way to have appeased the British public who wanted a loco hauled coaches

I think you are confusing enthusiasts with the 'British Public' - the public don't really care about the motive power of their train, just that it's affordable, clean, on time and relatively comfortable

 

[OMGitsDAVE]

These trains are all awful compared to the iconic and comfortable HST 125s they replaced. I really don't think the general public will take to them in quite the same way.

If i'm honest, the 'general public' are looking for quick journeys to their destinations, not necessarily an iconic train. It all depends, if they're business travellers, they would rather be in central London or a business area as quickly as possible - they won't really care about what train is pulling them there. HST's are iconic, I agree, but times are changing and people want speed, capacity and to an extent comfort.

 

[DB]

I'm not too familiar with the seat names, but the latest ones, as can be found on EMR's 158s.

Those are Grammer seats (as fitted to standard class in the FGW / GWR / Scotrail HSTs).

 

[Parallel]

I much prefer the HST to the IET in terms of ride quality and passenger comfort. I find the seating much better on HSTs, mainly the shape and padding. I think the seating is probably the worst thing about the IETs in my opinion, it's very hard for long distance travel and as I'm quite tall, I find that I have to slouch in the seats for them to be bearable. If I sit with a straight back, the head rest pushes my shoulders forward and my back and neck aren't supported. It's OK for short distances but not comfortable for longer distances. That said, the leg room is excellent on both.

In my opinion, the only intercity type unit that comes close to the experience offered by HSTs would be the Class 180s. I understand they are plagued with other problems, but based on passenger comfort alone, they are by far my favourite.

I don't think IETs are bad trains, it's more about the fixtures and fittings which could've probably been better. I do also enjoy having an on board shop/buffet car too as I like to have the free rein to go and browse/purchase, rather than being served at-seat at sporadic times throughout the journey - Although that's better than nothing.

 

[Metal_gee_man]

I think you are confusing enthusiasts with the 'British Public' - the public don't really care about the motive power of their train, just that it's affordable, clean, on time and relatively comfortable

Yes... Yes... You are correct, however regular users who are more astute than Joe Public and less anoraky than us lot would probably appreciate the comfort of coach than a Multiple unit, the green/veggie/vegan brigade would appreciate the bi-mode and the regular sleeper would love the quiet of a hauled coach.
But knowing the difference and caring are two difference things lol

 

[Ianno87]

Yes... Yes... You are correct, however regular users who are more astute than Joe Public and less anoraky than us lot would probably appreciate the comfort of coach than a Multiple unit,

Surprisingly few do. Look at the popularity of Pendolinos.

 

[delt1c]

IET is better for:
- performance especially acceleration
- brakes that don’t stink

HST is better for:
- ride quality
- seat quality
- no underfloor engine noise
- seats aligned to windows (at least when built)

I love the HST and travelled on them from introduction, however only 1st Class seats all aligned towindows when built. There is only one body shell which meant not all standard seats aligned

 

[Metal_gee_man]

Surprisingly few do. Look at the popularity of Pendolinos.

Too true, I'm not a fan, they get me A to B when I have to use them, but I've been known to go to Marylebone to get to Birmingham to get a comfy seat, and generally enough space, that tapering of the sides really makes them claustrophobic

 

[cactustwirly]

The HSTs were good trains, I for one enjoyed traveling on them.
But they were not fit for a 21st Century railway, the 800 series is without a doubt a better train, with a much greater seating capacity, airier and much more modern, plus they are far more accessible.

The seats and luggage space could be improved, but overall an improvement, bringing the railways upto modern standards.

 

[Doomotron]

HSTs: better seats.
8xx: better train.

 

[hexagon789]

performance especially acceleration

On electric, on diesel only 802s and GWR's 800 are better and that was only with mods. An HST will still better an Azuma on diesel for instance

 

[hexagon789]

But they were not fit for a 21st Century railway

If they had had plug-doors and retention tanks as was considered in the design AND BR had taken Paxman up on their offer for a more powerful engine, I wonder then if the HSTs might have lasted in bulk even longer than they did.

 

[Mikey C]

HSTs: better seats.
8xx: better train.

In 15 years time or whenever when somebody refurbishes the IETs with better seats AND a more attractive interior, most of their problems will be sorted

Not so popular with enthusiasts perhaps, but the IETs have window blinds which many passengers appreciate

 

[Bletchleyite]

But which seats? There have been at least three different types fitted to HSTs.

I wold regards the Primarius ones, as fitted to LNER and XC HSTs, as probably the best modern seats.

Those seats serve to highlight how it's the cushion that makes more difference than the frame. When GNER fitted them, they installed a fairly hard single-piece cushion, which had the effect of the base sloping the wrong way i.e. towards the front. They gave me terrible backache as a result, and were for a long time my least favourite seat - so bad that I wouldn't travel on GNER as a result.

Virgin's refurb replaced them with softer two-piece cushions which didn't have that problem - and as a result I like them.

Also note that Class 170s have two different styles of frame (one Chapman, one something else) but both have the same cushion!

So the Fainsa Sophia frame is not in and of itself a bad seat. It just needs the base cushion replacing with one that you can't feel the support through. Even a bit of wood underneath would do it for me.

 

[Clansman]

Are you 100% sure?

Mk3s are coaches, not self powered units, so what powers them is irrelevant. Just ask GA, Virgin, HT, CS, TPE.

So yes, ScotTrains is spot on with what he claims about the listed issues being rectifiable, including regarding diesel. I think he was being general rather than being specific about ScotRail.

 

[Energy]

Mk3s are coaches, not self powered units, so what powers them is irrelevant. Just ask GA, Virgin, HT, CS, TPE.

So yes, ScotTrains is spot on with what he claims about the listed issues being rectifiable, including regarding diesel. I think he was being general rather than being specific about ScotRail.

Yes and no, he says this issue has been fixed on the refurb (wabtec) stock, the diesel issue has not. Also the HST mk3s have different wiring so can't easily be hauled with electric traction.