Trivia (sort of): Quietest and smoothest at speed

[47271]

This question really isn't trivial at all, it's very important to us bouncing around on a daily basis, but I thought that I'd do the right thing and categorise it as such.

At the weekend, a friend who is a regular on the Caledonian Sleeper, but also travels extensively by other services, claimed to me that be believes that a well maintained mk3 sleeper at 35+ years old still offers the quietest and smoothest ride of any UK stock at speed. He qualified this by saying that he bases the claim on travelling amidships and not over the wheels, and that 'at speed' means anything of 80mph or more.

The sleeper has a couple of physical features going for it I suppose: small windows and the guarantee of a solid door between the passenger and corridor noises. Also bear in mind that under normal timekeeping it shouldn't be running above 80 anyway.

Assuming that we accept that 80mph plus is 'speed', what does everyone else think?

Personally, I'd probably go for a 395, which is a good sign considering the number of trains Hitachi is churning out at the moment. I'm also very partial to a Transpennine 350.

To be fair on any design we have to assume a good state of maintenance, and this is all about quiet and smooth, so other characteristics such as lighting, seating, temperature or smells (I think you know what I mean) aren't relevant.

 

[AlterEgo]

Quietest GB stock I've been on is a 390. It might be over-engineered and have several flaws, but a properly maintained 390 can be exceptionally quiet, even at 125mph.

 

[Clansman]

395s most definitely. Nothing beats it.

An absolute gem of a train. I wish we had them up here.

 

[306024]

Considering the track they had to run on, Class 309s seemed to simply glide along.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Considering the track they had to run on, Class 309s seemed to simply glide along.

As did (non-"Greyhound") 421/4-CIGs...

Of current stock, 333s are smooth, as are 185s if you're coasting and you're in the "eco-mode" carriage. An LM 350/1 was surprisingly pleasant from Wolvo to Crewe back in April, far nicer than the defective 390 that limped from Crewe to Stockport before being failed with what felt like severe wheel flats!

 

[Strathclyder]

On the M.U front, 380s are most certainly among the quietest & smoothest trains I've ever travelled on. Makes up for the rather sterile & cold feel to their interior.

As far as loco-hauled stock is concerned, I recall that the Mk4s gave a supremely smooth ride when I had a set from Edinburgh to Stevenage (& the Peterborough - Glasgow Central return) when I went down to the Hertfordshire town to visit relatives in the early 2000s (in GNER days). Haven't had the chance to ride a Mk3 loco-hauled set in regular service, so I personally can't comment on them...

 

[goblinuser]

Always find 395s and 373s to be very good in terms of ride quality, but I'm not sure if it's just because they're on good new track designed for high speeds.

 

[Ash Bridge]

For me it would have to be a HST mk3 trailer car every time provided that the sliding saloon doors and exterior door droplights were firmly closed, also highly rate the class 373s, never travelled on a 395 so unable to comment on those. The mk2d 1st class compartment stock were also incredibly quiet in their day and as 306024 mentioned the class 309s were excellent especially so in the 1st class compartments, even in their twilight years with FNW when employed on Manchester Picc-Birmingham NS runs.

 

[Mag_seven]

Quietest GB stock I've been on is a 390. It might be over-engineered and have several flaws, but a properly maintained 390 can be exceptionally quiet, even at 125mph.

Yer havin a laff surely! hock:

Give me a mark III coach over a 390 anyday!

 

[AM9]

Considering the track they had to run on, Class 309s seemed to simply glide along.

I'd agree with that. The 309s were probably amongst the best MKI stock rides, mainly because of the Commonwealth bogies with (originally experimental) wheel profiles designed to limit hunting, - something necessary on the heavily used GEML. They certainly rode better than the class 47 hauled MKIs and MKIIs on London to Norwich services, especially over jointed track sections.
Any impression of smoothness must be considered in context of the permanent way compared with other rolling stock on the same track at similar speeds and the individual vehicle's maintenance state. In my experience, the MKIIIs are very variable, even on the GWML. On the B&H, I've experienced very sloppy performance at speeds definitely well below 100mph. Conversely, even some Pacers travel quite smoothly (at 75mph) on the CWR of some trunk routes.
A more interesting comparison would be of how some classes handle known difficult track formations like the Mill Hill bumps or the chaotic BML fast stretches.

 

[Mag_seven]

Any impression of smoothness must be considered in context of the permanent way compared with other rolling stock on the same track at similar speeds and the individual vehicle's maintenance state. In my experience, the MKIIIs are very variable, even on the GWML. On the B&H, I've experienced very sloppy performance at speeds definitely well below 100mph. Conversely, even some Pacers travel quite smoothly (at 75mph) on the CWR of some trunk routes. A more interesting comparison would be of how some classes handle known difficult track formations like the Mill Hill bumps or the chaotic BML fast stretches.

Good point - its as much about the state of the track as it is the rolling stock.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Class 158 with the engine out. The suspension is truly excellent and rides smoothly on the worst track. It's a shame they didn't build some LHCS based on it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quietest GB stock I've been on is a 390. It might be over-engineered and have several flaws, but a properly maintained 390 can be exceptionally quiet, even at 125mph.

Ride can be poor, though, with hitting the stops common.

 

[47271]

Thank you for the point on track condition, I was thinking it but failed to add it to the OP. I should've said that I'm assuming well maintained track as much as a well maintained train.

I agree on Pendolinos often hitting their stops and other assorted bangs and bumps, and I get this on VTEC mk3s quite a bit too. I'd normally put this down to maintenance, whether of train or track, but neither would I see as smoothest or quietest even at the best of times. I always give a wide berth to sitting over the bogies on either type.

I'd venture that a dmu car being smooth and quiet only because its engine is out of action doesn't count!

 

[delt1c]

how about the DMBS on 105 at full revs going through a tunnel. Now i must get another beer

 

[TH172341]

Class 350s win it for me; very quiet and ride quality excellent. MK3s best of the loco hauled stock. DMU wise I'll go for the 168s/170s; find them excellent on the Chiltern runs.

 

[bramling]

This question really isn't trivial at all, it's very important to us bouncing around on a daily basis, but I thought that I'd do the right thing and categorise it as such.

At the weekend, a friend who is a regular on the Caledonian Sleeper, but also travels extensively by other services, claimed to me that be believes that a well maintained mk3 sleeper at 35+ years old still offers the quietest and smoothest ride of any UK stock at speed. He qualified this by saying that he bases the claim on travelling amidships and not over the wheels, and that 'at speed' means anything of 80mph or more.

The sleeper has a couple of physical features going for it I suppose: small windows and the guarantee of a solid door between the passenger and corridor noises. Also bear in mind that under normal timekeeping it shouldn't be running above 80 anyway.

Assuming that we accept that 80mph plus is 'speed', what does everyone else think?

Personally, I'd probably go for a 395, which is a good sign considering the number of trains Hitachi is churning out at the moment. I'm also very partial to a Transpennine 350.

To be fair on any design we have to assume a good state of maintenance, and this is all about quiet and smooth, so other characteristics such as lighting, seating, temperature or smells (I think you know what I mean) aren't relevant.

How about the trailer cars on a 365? Very quiet and smooth, and the motor cars are fairly quiet for EMUs except when sitting directly over the bogies. Do get noise from the windows though, not that this is a bad thing IMO. The 387s give a much rougher and harsher ride over the same track, and in my experience are no quieter.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yer havin a laff surely! hock:

Give me a mark III coach over a 390 anyday!

I'm on a 390 now and while it's not "better" than a MkIII it's quieter in my opinion.

 

[edwin_m]

Class 158 with the engine out. The suspension is truly excellent and rides smoothly on the worst track. It's a shame they didn't build some LHCS based on it.

The Mk3 DVTs have the same bogie. Unfortunately you can't ride in one...

 

[edwin_m]

Class 350s win it for me; very quiet and ride quality excellent. MK3s best of the loco hauled stock. DMU wise I'll go for the 168s/170s; find them excellent on the Chiltern runs.

I've been really thrown around on the TPE 350s when they hit pointwork - may be something to do with the track condition further north.

Going back to the OP, IIRC the sleeper is normally limited to 80mph which probably helps.

But nothing in the UK compares with many trains on the Continent. A recent ride on a fairly elderly Intercity EMU in Belgium (Brussels-Bruges, up to about 160km/h I guess) was completely smooth from start to finish.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'd venture that a dmu car being smooth and quiet only because its engine is out of action doesn't count!

But what if the engine is out on purpose, such as eco mode on 185s?

 

[work-traveller]

At the weekend, a friend who is a regular on the Caledonian Sleeper, but also travels extensively by other services, claimed to me that be believes that a well maintained mk3 sleeper at 35+ years old still offers the quietest and smoothest ride of any UK stock at speed. He qualified this by saying that he bases the claim on travelling amidships and not over the wheels, and that 'at speed' means anything of 80mph or more.

That qualification of 'at speed' is significant as the Fort William service creeks and groans its way around the West Highlands.

 

[LunchSociety]

395s most definitely. Nothing beats it.

An absolute gem of a train. I wish we had them up here.

THIS. They are superb trains and an absolute pleasure to travel on at speed. I also do love the traction sound so its a win-win for me. Though of course there's always plenty of people who would disagree on a topic this subjective.

 

[Silverlink]

Mark 3 class 321 most quiet trains ever! If you open the windows it's even more quiet

 

[AverageTD]

395 definitely and when the 800s are in service there will be no question. Hitachi does well when it comes to noise and comfort

 

[J-2739]

The 700s are pretty quiet, but also pretty bumpy too at the wheels. When you get to the centre, they're way better.

The 158s are smooth, but not so quiet! The engine noise on them are pretty calming tho.

 

[KevinTurvey]

Quietest/smoothest overall IMHO = 373 When running on the ECML the difference between these and the Mk4 was huge.

Of the hauled stock Mk3 are probably about the best. Mk2s were also good, but the ride got a bit lively at 100 mph. For the MK1 variety I thought Commonwealths rode ever so slightly better than the B4's but did seem to be nosier.

Mention must also be made of all the BREL designed sprinter stock. Ignoring the engine noise, the ride quality at the unpowered ends is excellent, and actually to me seems better than the EMUs of the same period.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

395 definitely and when the 800s are in service there will be no question. Hitachi does well when it comes to noise and comfort

I think the driving cars will be very good but people will be surprised by how noticeable the transmission whine is on the powered intermediate cars. Unless of course the upholstered interior deadens the sound, my experience was in a pretty bare bodyshell on test!

 

[47271]

That qualification of 'at speed' is significant as the Fort William service creeks and groans its way around the West Highlands.

Absolutely, he was thinking more of the West Coast Main Line than jointed track around the Bridge of Orchy horseshoe!

Is there anywhere beyond Helensburgh where 80mph is possible anyway?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I think the highest line speed between Helensburgh-Fort William is 60mph, and that's probably for multiple units only? Most of the route is about 40mph from memory.