Ugliest EMU/DMU

[ginge]

I can't believe that we are into the second page of this discussion about ugly trains and no one has brought up the former class 460 Darth Vader units

 

[fowler9]

I can't believe that we are into the second page of this discussion about ugly trains and no one has brought up the former class 460 Darth Vader units

Ha ha, they popped in to my head for a second and then vanished. I guess I blanked them out, hideous.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

With the 380s does the driver have to press/hold a button to get the coridoor connections to connect (once the two units are physically coupled) or does it get done automatically. I wonder what one of them would looke like coupled to a 350.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/2407_at_Moreton,_Dorset.JPG

I think the 442s looked best in that livery. How were the jumper panel covers causing injuries?

 

[nlogax]

I think the 442s looked best in that livery. How were the jumper panel covers causing injuries?

Too heavy, apparently. Revised versions (as seen in your photo) were lighter.

http://www.semgonline.com/gallery/class442_1.html

 

[Harpers Tate]

140 takes my vote.
As for some of the other suggestions, I forgive, really, anything that "suffers from" a gangway end, because of the usefulness (and unavoidable aesthetic impact) of that feature.

Speaking of which, 150s (without gangways) are pretty plain affairs.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I'm a little surprised the 334 and 175 haven't been mentioned, they aren't exactly pretty. My vote would have to be for the 458/5s, the 460s and 458/0s aren't exactly beautiful, but the 458/5s are a special type of ugly.

 

[eastwestdivide]

Those lopsided Belgian 2-car units...
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gemoderniseerd_klassiek_treinstel.JPG

 

[jopsuk]

if we're allowing trains from any country, then the practical but ugly Danish IC3

 

[Tetchytyke]

Those lopsided Belgian 2-car units...
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gemoderniseerd_klassiek_treinstel.JPG

If we want really ugly, how about the Belgian AM96 EMUs?

The driver looks like he's sitting in a padded cell.

 

[nlogax]

The driver looks like he's sitting in a padded cell.

Staring out from within the gaping maw of a corridor connection. Grim.

 

[eastwestdivide]

If we want really ugly, how about the Belgian AM96 EMUs?

The driver looks like he's sitting in a padded cell.

Close-run thing between those and the older Belgian units. At least the AM96 are vaguely symmetrical, without too many sticky-out bits in random directions.

 

[plastictaffy]

Class 395 Javelin units are very pretty, and very sleek looking.
Ugly units..........Hmm. Anything with corridor connections.

 

[TheEdge]

Three pages and this is yet to gain a mention...

-EDIT-

Oh no, I forgot about the N700 Series Shinkansen

-EDIT 2-

Give the steam some love and/or pity....

(not my pictures)

 

[317666]

Bombardier Talent2 has got to be up there: http://www.busbahnbilder.de/images/galerie/pics/44708_442_822.JPG

In the UK, I think the 378s or the London Midland 172s are some of the worst-looking units.

Noticed a couple of Belgian nominations earlier in the thread. How about the MS75 'Pig Nose' units? http://www.rail-pictures.com/1024/am-75-839-is-waiting-7802.jpg

Oh, and last of all, the CFL 2200 double decker units (and their SNCF counterparts): http://www.rail.lu/im/x/Halanzy-2204-cfl-07-04-08-(4).jpg

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Forgot they existed, but then remembered them and I'd like to nominate the 139s as a particularly ugly unit- the earlier prototype especially, thanks to the haphazardly-applied yellow warning panel

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Personally, I think first prize should go to the 380s.

The designers must have been p**sed when doing the drawings

 

[theageofthetra]

That ugly Dutch train reminds me of those Bristol freighters that you could take your car across the channel in.

 

[jopsuk]

Three pages and this is yet to gain a mention...

Japenese railways have several similar looking units. This particular class is asymmetric- in 4 & 8 car units, with gangways at one end only

 

[swt_passenger]

That ugly Dutch train reminds me of those Bristol freighters that you could take your car across the channel in.

Don't they just. I've added a link to the wikipedia photo for anyone who doesn't remember them...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bristol_170_Freighter_32_of_Silver_City_Airways.jpg

 

[racyrich]

At least things have improved from the Wirral 503s. Luckily I'm from Essex so only once had my eyeballs offended by them, at Birkenhead Rock ferry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Image-British-Rail-Class-503.jpg


I like those 442s with the exposed jumpers. They were very bland all covered up. With their curved windows they resemble the Clacton 309s - lovely stuff

 

[Class172]

These old MSJAR class 505 units were not too attractive either...

 

[507 001]

At least things have improved from the Wirral 503s. Luckily I'm from Essex so only once had my eyeballs offended by them, at Birkenhead Rock ferry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Image-British-Rail-Class-503.jpg


I like those 442s with the exposed jumpers. They were very bland all covered up. With their curved windows they resemble the Clacton 309s - lovely stuff

How dare you!


How on earth can you think a 309 is more attractive than a 503????


definitely the former class 460 for me.

 

[EM2]

503s and 505s are ugly?
That's heresy! They're fantastic looking things, all proper grilles and cables.
The 319s, however...

 

[colchesterken]

I think the 505 look sweet because they are so ugly bit like a boxer dog people like them because they look brutish
I agree the 309s and the TPE dmus class 126 I think. were nice cos they were rounded like a cuddly lady you want to stroke them ,,not the same when they put the flat windows in

 

[eastwestdivide]

Those MSJA 505s seem to have been designed on the following principles:
1. take a coach.
2. the driver needs to see out, so cut some windows in the end.
3. need headlights, cables etc, so bolt those on wherever convenient.
4. job done.

In other words only trying to make them functional, not even trying to make them look good. Pretty much the same I'd say for the 455s (the earlier design), and in fact most SR EMUs prior to the CIG/VEPs, where they went over to the "slightly-rounded" front ends.

Oh dear, I'm straying dangerously into "it's just a box on wheels" territory...

Edit: 309s and Transpennine 124 DMUs (and Intercity 123s) - the rounded windows did add a certain style, but I think they got replaced with flat panes because the curved glass was either too expensive to replace or was more prone to damage (or both?). Either way, function trumped aesthetics.

 

[fishquinn]

How dare you!


How on earth can you think a 309 is more attractive than a 503????


definitely the former class 460 for me.

460?

In my opinion they look really nice.

 

[jopsuk]

Most of the earlier pre-BR southern Railway units (later classed 40x) had some level of actual design to the front ends. the 404 (4-COR, 4-RES, 4-BUF and 4-GRI) was perhaps rather less "designed"- and that then followed into the largely derived 41x classes. The 42x and 43x classes are the (as I understand it) the ones actually using the mark 1 coach design (indeed, often with Mark 1 hauled coaches in the formation- or in the case of the 4TCs, the entire formation).

For 455s and 317s there seems to be a lot of differing opinion as to whether the original design (seen now on 455/8 and 317/5 , /3 and /8) or revised (455/7 & 9, 317/6). It is quite clear though that of these classes, the rebuilt end of the 317/7 is just bad. The 150s 318s and NIR 450s all used (with or without gangway) the later 317/455 roof line- the 210s were earlier and used the original.

 

[talltim]

I really like the look of the IC3 and the Belgian unit that used the same rubber technology

 

[nlogax]

For 455s and 317s there seems to be a lot of differing opinion as to whether the original design (seen now on 455/8 and 317/5 , /3 and /8) or revised (455/7 & 9, 317/6). It is quite clear though that of these classes, the rebuilt end of the 317/7 is just bad. The 150s 318s and NIR 450s all used (with or without gangway) the later 317/455 roof line- the 210s were earlier and used the original.

I've often seen it mentioned that the 455s and 317s were the worst case of BR 'design by committee'. In terms of external cab design, I would agree with that. The cab roofline on the first tranches of both classes looked like a dog's breakfast.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

The later 455/9 and 317/1 (?) shared the same basic design and IMHO were reasonably pleasing compared to the older 455/8 and 317/0

The 319's aren't bad looking either (when they're clean!)

4Ceps/309s and Scottish 303's were real "proper" trains and looked the part

Mind you, I much prefer the look of a 455/8 (old style) than a 380....