Worst Rolling Stock in UK

[sprinterguy]

We have not come to the worst of all the Class 139. I recently went on one for the first time a couple of weeks ago and they are horrific. It has to be seen to be believed. They are my nomination for this section.

Nah, they're fun. The 139s are the bread van style minibus of the railway world, a proper little branchline railcar. As long as they're confined to half mile lengths of self contained track like the Stourbridge Town branch and we're not seeing them on Bolton to Manchester commuter runs in twenty years time then it'll be fine.

They really do dive enthusiastically into each and every rail joint mind, I can't hide that fact...

 

[WestCoast]

Voyagers have the same problem as they have the same seats. The First Class on pendos is badly though out. If I had paid a huge amount of money rather than weekend upgrade I would enjoy my view of the rubbish bin, microwave and coffee maker in the passenger saloon. Who thought that was a good idea? It could have been a good train but has been let down by attention to detail.

Voyagers are better in that respect but are still uncomfortable on a long journey.

I have to disagree. While Pendos have their faults, I actually think they are very nice in First Class if you get the right seats. When comparing the two trains, Pendos have better interior design than Voyagers, one disabled toilet per coach and a very claustrophobic shop? An utter joke! I can live with some dodgy seats on a Pendo but not a complete lack of available seating and luggage space on a Voyager.

A situation which has changed with CrossCountry's alterations, which have downgraded the train to little more than a regional DMU in terms of facilities. Voyagers are poorly designed, they growl, and above all, they have hardly any seats! A Pendo seat is far comfier than the vestibule floor of a voyager!

 

[317653]

Now you see, Class 377/2 & /4 are fine they have a fresh and uplifting interior wheras the 377/1s and /3s have a dull and dreiry interior and also to me feel stale
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Can't agree. I've done a return to Chichester, twice, very well suited to purpose, performs well, was comfy and had plenty of room, what more could you want?

Now you see CLass377/4 and /2 are fine because they feel fresh inside a lovely refreshingn interor wheras the 377 1s and 3s have a dull and driery interior and to me feel stale

 

[LE Greys]

Now you see, Class 377/2 & /4 are fine they have a fresh and uplifting interior wheras the 377/1s and /3s have a dull and dreiry interior and also to me feel stale
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Now you see CLass377/4 and /2 are fine because they feel fresh inside a lovely refreshingn interor wheras the 377 1s and 3s have a dull and driery interior and to me feel stale

Personally, I'd have much preferred to see them on SWT than the 450s, even the 444s. Ideally still working alongside the 442s, but perhaps with those being replaced by a sort of Meridian/Electrostar hybrid with a non-tilt version of the Meridian body, Meridian seating layout, Electrostar cabs and a buffet counter.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
On the train comfort issue, the most comfortable general-service coach I've ever travelled in was a 1930s Stanier SK on the Severn Valley. I honestly thought it was first class until the grip convinced me otherwise. IIRC, this coach was allocated to Euston Downside, working a combination of express runs and suburban workings, just like a 350. Why then have we gone backwards since then? MkIs, built in the depths of Austerity Britain, were pleasant and comfortable with sprung seats and big windows. Early MkIIs pretty much the same. MkIIIs slipped a little, but still had fairly nice seats, although not so thoroughly sprung. As built, MkIVs were horrible in hindsight, not much better than a Voyager.

The answer, cost reductions. It is a lot cheaper to buy a load of plastic seat squabs and place foam rubber cushions on them than to fabricate seats out of metal and make proper sprung cushions. It's the same thing that allowed the Victorians to sit third class passengers on horsehair or oakum. I imagine that ordering 74 sprung cushions for 5 trailers in 56 HST sets would be expensive. Is it worth it?

 

[deltabravo]

Forgive me for sounding naive, but I have not been interested in the railways as long as some people.

I notice scattered throughout various threads lots of hate for Voyagers, why is this may I ask? I don't think they are that bad.

 

[Anon Mouse]

Forgive me for sounding naive, but I have not been interested in the railways as long as some people.

I notice scattered throughout various threads lots of hate for Voyagers, why is this may I ask? I don't think they are that bad.

Beacause they are too short for the routes they work, they are very cramped and claustrophobic when busy, the smells from the toilets take over the saloon and they replaced decent stock such as 47's and HST's!

When quiet they are not too bad, and 1st class is not too bad. However my Wife thinks they are the most comftable trains in the UK, I must disagree with her though!

 

[valenta]

Forgive me for sounding naive, but I have not been interested in the railways as long as some people.

I notice scattered throughout various threads lots of hate for Voyagers, why is this may I ask? I don't think they are that bad.

Yes, they are much too short for the journeys required, no wonder XC are invesiting in HST's!

Not to mention the automated reservation system that sometimes doesn't work, has anyone else ever experienced problems with this?
I much prefer the ticket system.

 

[WillPS]

Merseyrail Pacers are by far the worst. I'm sure anybody who thinks otherwise simply hasn't been on one. They are truly awful.

 

[Blindtraveler]

in order from 1 to 3:
1. Voyagers - noise, smell, length and more!
2. Any diziro but particularly 185s.
3. 156s. Not cumfortable for many runs and unsutable for others.

By the way, who said pacers on far north line? I like them, but too bouncy for that run.

 

[LE Greys]

Personally, I class Desiros as being worse than Voyagers, and will happily reject a 444 to Waterloo in favour of a 220 to Reading (although the HST run to Paddington might have something to do with that). Also, if a 158 arrives coupled to a 156, I'd go for the Super Sprinter. Seats are generally more comfortable and you can open the windows. Better ride at under 60 mph as well.

Still, when (by some miracle) a 37 arrives with a rake of MkIIa's...

 

[Anon Mouse]

Personally, I class Desiros as being worse than Voyagers, and will happily reject a 444 to Waterloo in favour of a 220 to Reading (although the HST run to Paddington might have something to do with that). Also, if a 158 arrives coupled to a 156, I'd go for the Super Sprinter. Seats are generally more comfortable and you can open the windows. Better ride at under 60 mph as well.

Still, when (by some miracle) a 37 arrives with a rake of MkIIa's...

One can dream!

I don't actually mind 444's and 450's, but that might be because they are pretty exotic for me!

 

[thefab444]

The trouble with 377s is they are trying to replace both long distance and suburban units and aren't all that good at either. It's not helped by what is either poor diagramming or poor availability of the required units. They're also starting to show their age somewhat, whereas the 444s are still fairly spotless.

377s have:

• More tables
• Faster door closing procedure and slightly better acceleration (as 444s are downrated so badly)

444s have:

• Better legroom (the difference in quality of seating between a 444 and long distance 377 is negligble)
• Considerably better First Class
• Less voluable and repetitive CIS
• Better cycle provision
• Considerably better fleet reliability and air-conditioning that actually works most of the time
• Proper vestibules

The only slightly annoying factors about 444s are the lack of luggage racks, overly bright lighting when travelling at night and the fact plug sockets are only fitted to one standard coach.

 

[WestCoast]

Merseyrail Pacers are by far the worst. I'm sure anybody who thinks otherwise simply hasn't been on one. They are truly awful.

Agree, 100%. End of. I'd kill for a 185 on my local line. Pacers are not a bit of fun anymore, I almost saw someone fall over standing up on one the other day.:roll:

 

[LE Greys]

I disagree about the seating and the air-con. 444 seats are absolutely rock-hard, whereas 377s have a little bit of spring to them, so they are comfortable to sit in for more than five minutes (still not as good as 442s and nowhere near CIG quality though). 377 air-con actually produces some air movement, whereas 444 air-con results in a sterile, airless atmosphere, like the inside of an airliner at high-altitude. I usually have to stand in a corridor connection to make it tolerable. Basically, Siemens promised a Volkswagen and delivered a Trabant (albeit hermetically-sealed).

Yet we had 442s with comfortable seats and a mobile atmosphere inside. I know I'm a wind-in-your face countryman who opens car windows in midwinter and hangs out of HSTs at full speed (carefully) but I can't understand why anyone would build such a thing. I'm also 5ft 9, so the legroom thing is less noticeable.

 

[HST Power]

Agree, 100%. End of. I'd kill for a 185 on my local line. Pacers are not a bit of fun anymore, I almost saw someone fall over standing up on one the other day.:roll:

Falling over isn't just a fault of the pacer. I've seen that happen a million times on 365s, 313s, 317s, you name it. And when you go through a long tunnel and a HST suddenly bottles past you at 120mph, making the whole train shudder, I've seen a few head knocks and mild injuries from that!

 

[thefab444]

I disagree about the seating and the air-con. 444 seats are absolutely rock-hard, whereas 377s have a little bit of spring to them, so they are comfortable to sit in for more than five minutes (still not as good as 442s and nowhere near CIG quality though). 377 air-con actually produces some air movement, whereas 444 air-con results in a sterile, airless atmosphere, like the inside of an airliner at high-altitude.

Not sure what 377s you're travelling on, but they're certainly not the ones I've been on where even the "express" seating is covered with astroturf and the armrests are way too high. The point I was making about the 377 air-con was that you're lucky if it works - a few weeks back I went on a fair few 377s and only one unit had properly working air-conditioning, the rest were either so poor as to be neglible or faulty. One unit was stuffy in all coaches except one which was a freezer.

Yet we had 442s with comfortable seats and a mobile atmosphere inside.

They didn't have a mobile atmosphere inside! In common with most BR stock of that era, the air-conditioning was rather puny, such that if there were more than about twenty people per coach it started getting stuffy and on a busy service you were breathing recycled air most of the time. The seats were better but the standard legroom was worse so it balances out for us tall people.

Besides, at least we have a dedicated express fleet, diagrammed properly, with Southern it's a real gamble as to whether you end up with ironing boards.

 

[Anonywave]

Class 378 for me - longitudinal seating on Overground trains is wrong, although it is good during peaks only.

Perhaps, they should have a mix of longitudinal and normal seating, like the LU 1972 stock (Bakerloo Line) or the S Stock.

 

[DJ_K666]

Personally, I class Desiros as being worse than Voyagers, and will happily reject a 444 to Waterloo in favour of a 220 to Reading (although the HST run to Paddington might have something to do with that). Also, if a 158 arrives coupled to a 156, I'd go for the Super Sprinter. Seats are generally more comfortable and you can open the windows. Better ride at under 60 mph as well.

Still, when (by some miracle) a 37 arrives with a rake of MkIIa's...

This actually happened to me back in 2002. We were going to Cardiff to see the Rugby and there were extra trains laid on. We just missed one so had to wait a while. I was expecting a 158 but a 37 rolled in with 7 mk2As behind it. Bliss. For a couple of hours it seemed as though every train out of Cardiff Central was loco hauled, each a 37 and each had 6 or 7 coaches.

Return journey was even better as it had a mk1 in the consist. Needless to say which coach I chose to sit in...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I thought I would join in this discussion trying to be objective.

Is the pacer a good train? It is better than when they were intoduced once proper train seating is installed. I was surprised a few weeks ago in Devon that some still had the original bus seats fitted. They are OK for short journeys but as others have said not suitable for anything over an hour, but better than nothing.

Is a pendo a good train? Yes and No. The trains are well specified for the route but the passenger compartment is a bit of an afterthought. There are a number of problems with the interior. The seats are very hard and I find I get cramp on a long journey. Voyagers have the same problem as they have the same seats. The First Class on pendos is badly though out. If I had paid a huge amount of money rather than weekend upgrade I would enjoy my view of the rubbish bin, microwave and coffee maker in the passenger saloon. Who thought that was a good idea? It could have been a good train but has been let down by attention to detail.

Voyagers are better in that respect but are still uncomfortable on a long journey.

We have not come to the worst of all the Class 139. I recently went on one for the first time a couple of weeks ago and they are horrific. It has to be seen to be believed. They are my nomination for this section.

As far as Pacers go, they are good for operation on branch lines, such as Harrogate to York.
I once went on one which went from York to Scarborough non-stop (I think it was a Hull service).
The driver's door window blind was open and we were watching the road ahead. We did in places hit the train's maximum speed of 75 but out of York are a large number of sharp curves and lengthy sections of jointed track so yes it was a somewhat lively ride. I also remember the 141s. If you want to try one of those go to the Midland Railway centre on Anything Goes day and see for yourself, or the Weardale Railway.

I'm indifferent to Pendos though. I like the speed if nothing else. Imho no match for nice comfy mk2 and 3 carriages with plenty of legroom and an easy view out. I get travel sick if I can't see out of the window

 

[Fincra5]

The trouble with 377s is they are trying to replace both long distance and suburban units and aren't all that good at either. It's not helped by what is either poor diagramming or poor availability of the required units. They're also starting to show their age somewhat, whereas the 444s are still fairly spotless.

377s have:

• More tables
• Faster door closing procedure and slightly better acceleration (as 444s are downrated so badly)

444s have:

• Better legroom (the difference in quality of seating between a 444 and long distance 377 is negligble)
• Considerably better First Class
• Less voluable and repetitive CIS
• Better cycle provision
• Considerably better fleet reliability and air-conditioning that actually works most of the time
• Proper vestibules

The only slightly annoying factors about 444s are the lack of luggage racks, overly bright lighting when travelling at night and the fact plug sockets are only fitted to one standard coach.

Comparing 444s to 377s just doesn't work. 444s are built for long distance stuff. 377s are designed for commuter runs.

 

[j0hn0]

377s are just terrible

fab444 hits the nail on the head for me, just too many compromises and poor mechanics make this the worst for me.

Considering they're fairly new trains, are passenger considerations even less pertinent these days?

Old stock just has so much more space and mechanically appear to be so much more reliable, any reason for this? (apart from the blatantly obvious)

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Has anyone else ever noticed that 377s and one of the 375 / somethings have 2+2 in the end coaches and 3+2 throughout?

I'd say 444s and 380s (absolutely awesome) are my faves, but 377s, 220s, 221s, and maybe 390s are the worst.

 

[Lampshade]

I like the 377s, but each to their own.

 

[OxtedL]

Ditto.

========================
Errr, that was a pretty meaningless post, so:

Being firmly in Bombardier territory, I'm always a little suspicious of Desiro's, particularly the odd noise they make when starting up. I'm sure you get used to it, but Electrostars sound nicer, certainly.

========================

Hmmmm... No, no better...

 

[j0hn0]

I like the 377s, but each to their own.

superficially yes, I like them too, newer trains are always smoother. But in terms of operational capabilities and passenger comfort, they are so much worse than 319's.

I quite like 390s

 

[Minstral25]

The 377's are brilliant trains. Comfortable and plenty of leg room because of all the tables. Ideal for me as I have leg room and a table for my coffee, sandwich and work. Rarely any trouble with Air Con (until recently I travelled on them daily so would have noticed faulty Air Con a lot).

Having said that I never travel in the centre cars - 3+2 seating, puny useless tables and loads of Airplane style seats that quite frankly are too small for someone who is 6'2", plus the loos often stink.

Not travelled much on SWT's Desiro's but the few times I have they seem like the centre cars of the 377's - all 3+2 and airplane seats. Give me a 377 any day.

Oh and 319's are rubbish - no tables, small seats but yes are a bit smoother ride

 

[MCR247]

Has anyone else ever noticed that 377s and one of the 375 / somethings have 2+2 in the end coaches and 3+2 throughout?

377/2s, /4s and /5s are all have this, as well as the higher numbered /1s

The lower numbered /1s and /3s are 2+2 throughout

 

[WestCoast]

For me at least, Siemens/CAF 332/333s are the best EMUs, I prefer them over any Desiro, Electrostar or Networker.

 

[thefab444]

I agree, the 333s seem quite nice despite the 3+2 seating, although they wouldn't really be suitable down here without end gangways.

Comparing 444s to 377s just doesn't work. 444s are built for long distance stuff. 377s are designed for commuter runs.

There are Class 377s that are designed for long distance work, like 444s, but they are not used exclusively on long distance runs and will often be found pottering around South London, whilst units with ironing board seats work out to Ore and Southampton! With so many variations of interior it seems Southern are incapable of diagramming the long distance units properly.

Not travelled much on SWT's Desiro's but the few times I have they seem like the centre cars of the 377's - all 3+2 and airplane seats. Give me a 377 any day.

There are two different sorts of Desiro, Class 444s designed for long distance work and Class 450s designed for shorter distances. A 450 is roughly equivalent to a commuter layout 377 coach, whereas a 444 is roughly equivalent (in my view superior) to a long distance layout 377 coach.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

When I'm out cross-over bashing in the inner-South London area, it's not uncommon to find 377s working around Streatham and Croydon. Why are the 313s running Brighton-Littlehampton etc when the units they replaced are running lines ideal for 313s?

 

[LE Greys]

I'll admit I ducked out of this one after nailing my colours to the 377 mast (I actually prefer 375s, and forgot about the trick of sitting in the end vehicles) because it was beginning to turn into a bit of a ping-pong thread. Given the choice, I would take neither and go for something with equivalent comfort to a 4-CIG, my favourite 3rd rail unit of the lot. It always astonishes me that anybody could think that either unit could be an improvement on what went before it. Sure, they needed new electrical equipment and a better body structure, but why not try to equal the comfort of the older units? It's perfectly possible, just add some padding (or better springs) to the seats and put air-blowers in the luggage racks. They have them in aircraft, coaches and 365s. That would resolve both problems without having to rearrange the seating or make the windows open.