• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Train Seat Guide

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ayman Ilham

Member
Joined
2 Jul 2016
Messages
412
Location
Blackburn (Lancs)
Yes and no. The replacement of the existing very thick backed seats with thin backed ones in the same layout means that there is about 2" (or a bit more than that) more legroom, which means I can fit in an airline seat and don't have to play kneesie at a table. To me, therefore, it's a total winner.
Ah okay, that's not bad then I guess :)
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
6,830
Yes and no. The replacement of the existing very thick backed seats with thin backed ones in the same layout means that there is about 2" (or a bit more than that) more legroom, which means I can fit in an airline seat and don't have to play kneesie at a table. To me, therefore, it's a total winner.

Not been on the refurbished train, but in general I find the legroom on 158s very poor, so on balance I'd prefer thinner seats (as long as the numbers stay the same!)
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Not been on the refurbished train, but in general I find the legroom on 158s very poor, so on balance I'd prefer thinner seats (as long as the numbers stay the same!)

They solve two aspects of the original layout that causes tall people issues - one is the actual space (solved by thinner backs) and the other is that the original seats are raked backwards, which means that unless you have a very short lower leg your knees hit the seat higher up and therefore there is less useful space. There's a third side-issue which is that as a tall person I've got used to bringing my knees lower by tucking my feet under my seat, but you can't do that either because they are too low! The design would work with 8 bodyside windows rather than 9, but we are where we are with the windows.

It really is a significant improvement - and without reducing the seat count and retaining the full window alignment too.
 

DanielTheEMid

Member
Joined
13 Mar 2019
Messages
32
I looked at an NGR train and they also use ironing board in australia
url
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,568
What are the first class seats on the class 800s/801s/802s? Standard class is Fainsa Sophia isn't it. Also, do the TPE mark 5 and 397 fleets have the same seats (in first and in standard) as their 802s which I have read are the same as GWR's (except for the colour of course)? The only 80x units I've been on so far have been GWR sets.
 

duffers2324

Member
Joined
1 May 2014
Messages
168
Location
Glasgow
Does anyone know what these seats are, i know the other half of the 158's have Grammar seats (Not my photo)Scotrail 158 Interior.jpg

Credit: Scotrail
 

duffers2324

Member
Joined
1 May 2014
Messages
168
Location
Glasgow
i would have to say they are comfortable enough my top 3 for seats would have to be

1: Scotrail Class 170 seats (refurbed) although there are a few now that are getting a tad firm
2: These class 158 Richmond seats, comfortable enough but a nice bit of spring to them
3: the old Ashbourne seats in Scotrail 156's pre refurb
 

superalbs

Established Member
Joined
3 Jul 2014
Messages
2,459
Location
Exeter
What are the first class seats on the class 800s/801s/802s? Standard class is Fainsa Sophia isn't it. Also, do the TPE mark 5 and 397 fleets have the same seats (in first and in standard) as their 802s which I have read are the same as GWR's (except for the colour of course)? The only 80x units I've been on so far have been GWR sets.
Fainsa MD, yes it's all the same.
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,568
Fainsa MD
Thanks for the answer; they aren't just the same Sophia seats as standard but with a pillow stuck to the headrest then. Wonder if this makes it worth paying 1st class fares to get away from the awfully hard Sophias in standard.
 

superalbs

Established Member
Joined
3 Jul 2014
Messages
2,459
Location
Exeter
Thanks for the answer; they aren't just the same Sophia seats as standard but with a pillow stuck to the headrest then. Wonder if this makes it worth paying 1st class fares to get away from the awfully hard Sophias in standard.
Yeah it's an upgrade - but don't worry, it's still bad! :D
 

TT-ONR-NRN

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
10,412
Location
Farnham
I don’t know the actual name of them, but I believe they are the same as first class on LNER Mk4s, just with a cloth covering rather than leather. If that is the case they’re incredibly comfortable seats
They’re different seats you can see from the headrest. These seats are the same as Chiltern Railways Business Zone, SWR 159 first and old FGW HST first before it had the GWR refurbishment
 

Mrwerdna1

Member
Joined
18 Jul 2018
Messages
61
Location
The Continent
Absence makes the heart grow fonder as they say and as unbelievable as it sounds, it almost seems seats reached their peak somewhere in the 90s or mid 2000s and we're now going backwards in time. I mean seriously, ironing board seats with little legroom on the class 700 can perhaps be somewhat justified, given that a lot of people's journeys may just be short enough to endure them (poor souls that have to travel Brighton-Bedford), but the seats used in the IET rollout are truly disgraceful. These are supposed to be intercity trains! I'm just glad I never travel first class on GWR, because value for money there seems to be even worse. Give me back HST seats (and ride-comfort)!

The uncomfortable suspension on the new trains just adds insult to injury. Lucky that I don't ever need to use the GWML for everyday commuting. I've seriously considered using alternative routes where possible at this stage (i.e. SWR to Exeter, Chiltern to Oxford etc.), where previously I would have definitely travelled with GWR.

I find it outrageous that despite the many bitter complaints and negative feedback, both by the rail-press and regular customers, this is still how services on the GWML will probably be run for the next 30+ years, with quite possibly no adjustments ever being made to either ride-comfort or seats. Disgraceful.

The new seats in the Greater Anglia Stadler & Aventra units (I believe two different types are used) and the original Desiro seats (Grammer E3000) prove that comfortable seats can be used on intercity/commuter trains even with today's fire and safety regulations and without taking up that much space. There's no excuse for any seats that are less comfortable than that, especially not on so-called intercity services.

LNER promised more comfortable seats for their Azuma trains, but they barely look any better than the ones used on the class 800/802. The design appears quite similar, so I assume it's the same seat type? Having not yet travelled on a class 801, can anyone here confirm that there even IS a difference? Again, such a shame: brand new trains, even built by a respectable manufacturer, yet they actually make service worse. All the while, fares continue to rise...

Also, though the ironing board seats seemed to have been used on various newer units (despite the complaints), from the looks of things there do appear to be some differences in comfort (or padding) depending on the train/TOC. I can't remember which unit I was travelling on a short while back (might have been on a Great Northern Ex-Thameslink 387 or possibly a Southern 377/6 or /7, but the seats appeared slightly more comfortable than those on the class 700. Am I imagining things or are there genuine differences across units?

For instance, I REALLY hope that the SWR class 701 "Arterio" seats won't be quite as uncomfortable as the ones used on the GWR class 387 or class 700 trains. I'm simply not willing to trade SWT Grammer E3000 seats for concrete seats and pay more for it. It's as if the DfT or TOCs have an utter contempt for passengers...

One other thing I've found to be a shame is that no new Desiro commuter/long-distance trains appear to have been ordered for quite a while now. Those trains really are some of the most solidly built units of the 2000s: quiet, great ride comfort and comfortable seats at that. We've seen a lot of "Desiro City" trains introduced in the last few years, but I'd love TOCs to order more "normal" Desiros in the future. What's the likelihood of that happening, I wonder?
 
Last edited:

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
12,978
LNER Azuma trains have the same seats as their GWR cousins, just different colour seat covers. The only redeeming feature is the excellent leg room.

You are correct in that there are different types of ironing board seat. The ones fitted to the 387s are not too bad, this is because they are wider, have arm rests and a reasonable amount of leg room. Sadly the ironing board seats fitted to the 700s, although the same basic design as those fitted to the 387s, are narrower, pushed right up against the side wall if the train, have no arm rests and have awful leg room.
 

tetudo boy

Member
Joined
5 Apr 2018
Messages
382
Location
Near Liverpool
Absence makes the heart grow fonder as they say and as unbelievable as it sounds, it almost seems seats reached their peak somewhere in the 90s or mid 2000s and we're now going backwards in time. I mean seriously, ironing board seats with little legroom on the class 700 can perhaps be somewhat justified, given that a lot of people's journeys may just be short enough to endure them (poor souls that have to travel Brighton-Bedford), but the seats used in the IET rollout are truly disgraceful. These are supposed to be intercity trains! I'm just glad I never travel first class on GWR, because value for money there seems to be even worse. Give me back HST seats (and ride-comfort)!

The uncomfortable suspension on the new trains just adds insult to injury. Lucky that I don't ever need to use the GWML for everyday commuting. I've seriously considered using alternative routes where possible at this stage (i.e. SWR to Exeter, Chiltern to Oxford etc.), where previously I would have definitely travelled with GWR.

I find it outrageous that despite the many bitter complaints and negative feedback, both by the rail-press and regular customers, this is still how services on the GWML will probably be run for the next 30+ years, with quite possibly no adjustments ever being made to either ride-comfort or seats. Disgraceful.

The new seats in the Greater Anglia Stadler & Aventra units (I believe two different types are used) and the original Desiro seats (Grammer E3000) prove that comfortable seats can be used on intercity/commuter trains even with today's fire and safety regulations and without taking up that much space. There's no excuse for any seats that are less comfortable than that, especially not on so-called intercity services.

LNER promised more comfortable seats for their Azuma trains, but they barely look any better than the ones used on the class 800/802. The design appears quite similar, so I assume it's the same seat type? Having not yet travelled on a class 801, can anyone here confirm that there even IS a difference? Again, such a shame: brand new trains, even built by a respectable manufacturer, yet they actually make service worse. All the while, fares continue to rise...

Also, though the ironing board seats seemed to have been used on various newer units (despite the complaints), from the looks of things there do appear to be some differences in comfort (or padding) depending on the train/TOC. I can't remember which unit I was travelling on a short while back (might have been on a Great Northern Ex-Thameslink 387 or possibly a Southern 377/6 or /7, but the seats appeared slightly more comfortable than those on the class 700. Am I imagining things or are there genuine differences across units?

For instance, I REALLY hope that the SWR class 701 "Arterio" seats won't be quite as uncomfortable as the ones used on the GWR class 387 or class 700 trains. I'm simply not willing to trade SWT Grammer E3000 seats for concrete seats and pay more for it. It's as if the DfT or TOCs have an utter contempt for passengers...

One other thing I've found to be a shame is that no new Desiro commuter/long-distance trains appear to have been ordered for quite a while now. Those trains really are some of the most solidly built units of the 2000s: quiet, great ride comfort and comfortable seats at that. We've seen a lot of "Desiro City" trains introduced in the last few years, but I'd love TOCs to order more "normal" Desiros in the future. What's the likelihood of that happening, I wonder?
I feel your pain.

The most abismal part is that they need to stick to an extremely strict rule that prevents incidents to them, such as the seats catching fire. The Civities use the same type of seats from fainsa, but they have a different and more comfortable cushioning. The same goes for class 397.

I think that the Class 700 was intended for short hop services, which, by looking at the length and amount of time the services take for either London or the full length, they're DEFINITELY not short hop services, and they look like they are used by commuters who are travelling between Suburban areas and London, which can usually take around an hour commute. This is made worse by the fact that First Class on longer distance services is not declassified on longer-distance services. The first-class seating is decent on class 700 set's and I find it outrageous that they are not declassified on longer-distance services.

It's just outrageously hard to believe that these seats are still in service with Thameslink after 4 years of service, and Thameslink has NO plan of replacing them. I'm shocked. There is no excuse for them to still be around.

Note: Remember that it was not Siemens' fault for purchasing these seat's, it was largely the DfT's fault.
 

supervc-10

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2012
Messages
701
I find it outrageous that they are not declassified on longer-distance services.
I don't think this is what you're saying- but this reads as you just want to sit in the first class section on any 700 operated service with a standard class ticket! :lol:

The situation with fire safety etc is kind of proven false by the presence of better seats on the GA FLIRTs. I don't believe for one second that the ironing boards are anything other than cost saving!
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,530
It's just outrageously hard to believe that these seats are still in service with Thameslink after 4 years of service, and Thameslink has NO plan of replacing them. I'm shocked. There is no excuse for them to still be around.
It is not outrageously hard to believe. The costs of changing the seats would be 'shocking' and frankly not the best use of money that doesn't exist. The best hope for those who don't like the seats is that they aren't installed in other rolling stock.

Most people just travel on these trains to get from one place to another. They are suitable for the job they do.

Isn't this meant to be a thread about identifying seats rather than commenting on them?
 

Mrwerdna1

Member
Joined
18 Jul 2018
Messages
61
Location
The Continent
The situation with fire safety etc is kind of proven false by the presence of better seats on the GA FLIRTs. I don't believe for one second that the ironing boards are anything other than cost saving!
Exactly! The seats used on the GA Aventras aren't too bad either (though maybe the bar has just been lowered significantly). Be that as it may, what's wrong with the Grammer E3000 seats? Are they really that unsafe? The ludicrous thing is, they may still be marketed as commuter seats, but I'd have them any day of the week and twice on Thursdays instead of the current class 800/801/802 intercity seats. Imagine trying to re-film those 70s British Rail Intercity 125 commercials today trying to pretend that the IET seats are comfortable :lol: No one would believe it for a second.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top