Straw poll, Pendolino vs M3 coach

[shaun]

Somebody mentioned high Pendolino seatbacks.
Have you tried the refurbished FGW HSTs or EMT 158s?
View = nil, except for the blank plastic seat back 12 inches in front of you.

Yes the seats are high, but the legroom is exxceptional and the seats themselves are wider than the Pendo/voyager ones. Not to mention better padding and bigger drop down tables. High seats don't bother me personally, you can still see fine out of the window just not down the train. It's quite nice being tucked away behind those seats on FGW.

 

[Daimler]

Yes the seats are high, but the legroom is exxceptional and the seats themselves are wider than the Pendo/voyager ones. Not to mention better padding and bigger drop down tables. High seats don't bother me personally, you can still see fine out of the window just not down the train. It's quite nice being tucked away behind those seats on FGW.

I agree - the FGW Mk3 refurbishment is, in my eyes, a lesson in how these things should be done.

 

[asylumxl]

Yes the seats are high, but the legroom is exxceptional and the seats themselves are wider than the Pendo/voyager ones. Not to mention better padding and bigger drop down tables. High seats don't bother me personally, you can still see fine out of the window just not down the train. It's quite nice being tucked away behind those seats on FGW.

The irony is plenty of the enthusiasts who say they dislike high back seat and give reasons such as preferring an open carriage would love compartment stock to come back.

 

[IanXC]

I do wonder what would have happened if MK 3 stock had been modified with tilting mechanism & sliding or plug external doors?

Chiltern will of course soon introduce Mark 3s with new doors!

 

[Wath Yard]

Irrelevant really. The Pendos drew a lot of new passengers on to the WCML who would have ordinarily taken other routes. People like new, modern trains unlike enthusiasts.

Completely incorrect. Faster, more frequent journeys attracted more passengers to the WCML. And by the way, the growth in passengers since privatisation on the WCML is not significantly different to the growth in passengers on other routes. The high rate of growth has been achieved since the introduction of the VHF timetable, Pendolinos were introduced several years before this and there was not the same growth in passenger numbers.

We have to remember general public make up the majority of rail passengers, not enthusiasts.

What has that got to do with anything? A fact is a fact regardless of who uses a service.

 

[asylumxl]

Completely incorrect. Faster, more frequent journeys attracted more passengers to the WCML. And by the way, the growth in passengers since privatisation on the WCML is not significantly different to the growth in passengers on other routes. The high rate of growth has been achieved since the introduction of the VHF timetable, Pendolinos were introduced several years before this and there was not the same growth in passenger numbers.

And what gave faster, more frequent journeys?

As far as I'm aware the the maximum line speed for the non tilting stock is still 110mph, is it not?

Do you deny that trains with faster acceleration and a higher permissable speed allow for more capacity and as such higher frequency?

Or would you like to tell me that the increase in capacity is only due to some remodelling of bottlenecks?

And no, fact's are irrelevant. Public opinion is what is important, as the public make up the majority of passengers and as such revenue.

Everyone on this forum is quite aware of your dislike for Pendolinos, but the fact is they contributed to the passenger growth to an extent.

 

[DarloRich]

You'll have to forgive me if this has already been asked but I would be interested to know the opinions of passengers who have traveled on the West Coast pre-Pendolino and after the Pendolinos were introduced.

Would you say there is any appreciable difference in comfort and space between Mk3 and Pendolino carriages? Has the introduction of Pendolinos had a positive or negative effect on the amount of space for passengers?

I think many of you need to read the question posted by the OP. It doesnt say which train we prefer more or which one is better. it asks which is more comfortable for a passenger.

There is no contest - MKIII any day of the week. There is much more space within the carriage, there are windows you can see out of, the seats are wider than the pendos, the seats have much better padding ( more than the one inch of concrete fitted to a pendo seat), the seats have a much better length (space between seat back and seat edge, bum parking zone if you will), there are much bigger tables, there is a much better overall ambiance because there is better natural light and you do not have to suffer the claustrophobic, cave like design of the pendo, there are toilets that don’t smell ( and they do still smell on the pendo – It is most noticeable with regard to the one at the FC end of the unreserved second class coach)

On a MKIII you get a buffet/restaurant and not a "shop"/trolley. The interior specification of a Pendo leaves a lot to be desired. There is little or no thought to the people having to actually travel on these things especially in second class.

Anyone who suggests that a Pendolino is a more comfortable place to be than a MKIII frankly needs their head looking at. This is particularly the case in cattle class. The difference is even more pronounced in FC.

 

[43021HST]

I agree - the FGW Mk3 refurbishment is, in my eyes, a lesson in how these things should be done.

FGW refurbishment, some points are ok others not, the seats are so high it gives the coach a claustrophobic feel, pre-refurbishment MK3s seemed much more spacious due to the proper size seating. The replaced panelling on the inside was a good idea. The lighting though is much to harsh.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The irony is plenty of the enthusiasts who say they dislike high back seat and give reasons such as preferring an open carriage would love compartment stock to come back.

Corridor compartment stock doesn't feel claustrophobic, I find it can make rail travel very pleasant. The difference in a compartment you have much more leg room. and the compartment is usually quite spacious, roughly the size of a 165 first class section.

 

[Geezertronic]

Where is the "don't care as long as it gets me there quickly" option?

 

[4SRKT]

Where is the "don't care as long as it gets me there quickly" option?

In a poll about space and comfort it's not very relevant really is it?

 

[Minilad]

I prefer having Pendolinos running up and down the WCML than HST's. They are faster, quieter and offer a smoother journey. So as a train, yes, they are better.

390s better than HSTs Yeah OK then

 

[DarloRich]

390s better than HSTs Yeah OK then

they are, like, so much better! kids today :roll:

 

[Minilad]

they are, like, so much better! kids today :roll:

390s are awesome dude

 

[DarloRich]

390s are awesome dude

390s are, LIKE, awesome dude is the correct way of pronoucing it!

I wonder who people think have the best MKIII's? I would suggest Grand Central. Especially in FC as they offer a level of comfort and space far beyond anything else. (Even better when they have to subby in an FC vehicle for an SC on!)

 

[asylumxl]

In a poll about space and comfort it's not very relevant really is it?

Something which is entirely subjective.

 

[Minilad]

Something which is entirely subjective.

But you were happy to tell everyone earlier how uncomfortable IC70 seats are and that others agree with you. Subjective opinion then ?

 

[junglejames]

Ooh fun, I like these threads

I dont think theres much to add is there.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Everyone on this forum is quite aware of your dislike for Pendolinos, but the fact is they contributed to the passenger growth to an extent.

But even you have now changed your story. At last it is closer to the truth as well.
Before you made out as if passenger numbers were purely down to pendys. But it wasnt. The speed increase was mainly down to the upgrade. Pendys couldnt have gone 125 and tilted without it, and 125 is nothing new and amazing. Its normal elsewhere on older stock.
The increased frequency has been helped by the pendys and upgrade, but is mainly down to wanting a VHF timetable.

 

[asylumxl]

But you were happy to tell everyone earlier how uncomfortable IC70 seats are and that others agree with you. Subjective opinion then ?

You must have left your glasses at home old man.

To add to the seating debate, I find IC70 seats really uncomfortable. I don't think the seat backs were designed with taller people in mind to be honest.

Several people I know of similar height have agreed with me. I find the FGW HST seats quite comfortable as they allow me to sit up without slouching and rest my head back.

Where did I say IC70 are uncomfortable full stop. I quite clearly said i find them uncomfortable and people of similar heights have agreed with me.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ooh fun, I like these threads

I dont think theres much to add is there.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


But even you have now changed your story. At last it is closer to the truth as well.
Before you made out as if passenger numbers were purely down to pendys. But it wasnt. The speed increase was mainly down to the upgrade. Pendys couldnt have gone 125 and tilted without it, and 125 is nothing new and amazing. Its normal elsewhere on older stock.
The increased frequency has been helped by the pendys and upgrade, but is mainly down to wanting a VHF timetable.

Tell me what stock excluding the APT did 125mph on the WCML? On top of that, when did I say it was purely down to the Pendo?

Seriously I suggest you both read things more carefully.

Haven't you got some leg room or something to be measuring?

 

[ainsworth74]

Haven't you got some leg room or something to be measuring?

Nono that was Justin Smith who went around measuring leg room and window sizes

 

[asylumxl]

Nono that was Justin Smith who went around measuring leg room and window sizes

It may well have been but god they sound similar.

 

[SS4]

I've never been on a mark 3 so I've not voted but I still think the OP is asking a very loaded question, it cannot have escaped the OP's observation the prevailing opinion regarding MK3s and Pendos; namely that the former is the best thing since sliced bread whereas only pacers and voyagers come in below the latter. Hence I'm wondering what the OP wants to gain from the foregone results of this thread

390s are pretty comfortable although I'd be inclined to say they're too narrow and without enough leg room (but then being 6'1"/6'2" no stock has enough leg room )

 

[junglejames]

You must have left your glasses at home old man.



Where did I say IC70 are uncomfortable full stop. I quite clearly said i find them uncomfortable and people of similar heights have agreed with me.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Tell me what stock excluding the APT did 125mph on the WCML? On top of that, when did I say it was purely down to the Pendo?

Seriously I suggest you both read things more carefully.

Haven't you got some leg room or something to be measuring?

First of all you made out as if it was al down to the pendy. May not have meant it, but thats how it seemed.
Secondly, im not just on about the WCML. Thats why it was mainly the upgrade. Because the WCML wasnt capable of 125. The pendy was just anopther train capable of 125. Albeit it could tilt, which added some benefit.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I quite clearly said i find them uncomfortable and people of similar heights have agreed with me.

Assuming you are no taller than 6'3", can I be the first tall'n to disagree with you please?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It may well have been but god they sound similar.

Who does? Nobody else has mentioned measuring things.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I've never been on a mark 3 so I've not voted but I still think the OP is asking a very loaded question, it cannot have escaped the OP's observation the prevailing opinion regarding MK3s and Pendos; namely that the former is the best thing since sliced bread whereas only pacers and voyagers come in below the latter. Hence I'm wondering what the OP wants to gain from the foregone results of this thread

390s are pretty comfortable although I'd be inclined to say they're too narrow and without enough leg room (but then being 6'1"/6'2" no stock has enough leg room )

He probably wanted an answer that wasnt tainted with speed, tilt, acceleration etc etc.
We all know pendys can tilt and have better speed and acceleration than 87s/ 90s, but any discussion about pendys always gets lost in the pendy lovers going on about it. They use those excuses only to show they are the best thing since lifes bread. So now is the discussion that can have differing opinions, and hopefully one not lost under a barrage of tilt

 

[asylumxl]

This thread has two factions, loco lovers and unit lovers. Neither will convince the other. The OP knew this would happen anyway. But it wouldn't be a railway forum if we didn't have the same dicussions over and over .

 

[sprinterguy]

I wonder who people think have the best MKIII's? I would suggest Grand Central. Especially in FC as they offer a level of comfort and space far beyond anything else. (Even better when they have to subby in an FC vehicle for an SC on!)

In my humble opinion, Crosscountry and East Coast have the best mark 3s. Followed closely by the W&S refurbished carriages now in use with Chiltern.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I've never been on a mark 3 so I've not voted but I still think the OP is asking a very loaded question, it cannot have escaped the OP's observation the prevailing opinion regarding MK3s and Pendos; namely that the former is the best thing since sliced bread whereas only pacers and voyagers come in below the latter. Hence I'm wondering what the OP wants to gain from the foregone results of this thread

You've never been on a mark 3? hock: How have you managed to avoid them? Good god man, I insist that you get out there right now and see for yourself what you've been missing all this time!

 

[Minilad]

This thread has two factions, loco lovers and unit lovers. Neither will convince the other. The OP knew this would happen anyway. But it wouldn't be a railway forum if we didn't have the same dicussions over and over .

I don't think it is that at all. It is just that most modern trains (most of which tend to be units) are not as comfortable as the things that have gone before. I would have no problem at all with 390s if they had a decent interior. In my opinion they don't. I would quite happily use 350s 444s 395s into Euston as at least they are comfortable. The 390s are just too cramped and claustrophobic for me. Having said that I would rather use Chiltern into London. And if on the Loco hauled stock even better. But have no problem using 168s at all.
And the speed thing is a red herring IMO. I would rather take a little longer and be comfortable
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Where did I say IC70 are uncomfortable full stop. I quite clearly said i find them uncomfortable and people of similar heights have agreed with me.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Which is still a selective opinion as other people of similar hight might find them comfortable

 

[asylumxl]

Which is still a selective opinion as other people of similar hight might find them comfortable

But nowhere did I say that they wouldn't. I was just adding my 2 pence to the debate, since some people had already commented on the IC70s. There's nothing selective about it, it was an alternative view to what is essentially a debate.

 

[DarloRich]

I've never been on a mark 3 so I've not voted but I still think the OP is asking a very loaded question, it cannot have escaped the OP's observation the prevailing opinion regarding MK3s and Pendos; namely that the former is the best thing since sliced bread whereas only pacers and voyagers come in below the latter. Hence I'm wondering what the OP wants to gain from the foregone results of this thread

390s are pretty comfortable although I'd be inclined to say they're too narrow and without enough leg room (but then being 6'1"/6'2" no stock has enough leg room )

Never been on a MKIII - my god man where do you live? Venus?

I don’t actually mind the pendolino as a concept. It is clearly a very impressive bit of mechanical design and engineering. However the question posed relates to passenger comfort. There is no possible competition.

The pendo (and most modern trains) have a poor internal specification. It is almost like those who design the interiors have never thought about what it will be like to actually have to use them. Why is it that this super duper new train is so awful to actually travel in? It is almost as if the wider ergonomical aspect of design has been forgotten about.

Why is it possible that in the 21 century we can not improve on a 30-40 year old design in terms of passenger comfort? Or is it that train companies don’t care about passenger comfort any more?

 

[phil8715]

Mk3 coach every time. I hate Pendos with a passion.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[DarloRich]

But nowhere did I say that they wouldn't. I was just adding my 2 pence to the debate, since some people had already commented on the IC70s. There's nothing selective about it, it was an alternative view to what is essentially a debate.

out of intrest how tall are you?

 

[asylumxl]

out of intrest how tall are you?

6 foot 2 and bit inches.

If you wish to try and criticise my opinion to meet your ends, I'd like to remind you that different people have different proportions.

For me atleast, I find the seat backs on IC70 far too low which hurts my back. As such I have to slouch, which then means my knees are squished against the seat in front.