Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The best 156s were I thought the NorthWest Express ones with the Chapman seating. The Northern Spirit ones had Richmond seats, which lasted only a few years before the bases collapsed.
Whilst the obvious (and IMO fully-deserved) answer is the Class 142 with bus seats,)
The Merseyrail seat ones are even worse than the bus seat ones!
Indeed. Designed by a short, skinny person who likes sitting bolt upright. Awful things.
Travelled on the Valley Lines 142's just after they were refurbed and can tell you they transforned them, OK ride was still abit bouncy ( especially come down the valley) but all in good job done. It was a shame that other TOC's couldnt do the same with their.Speaking about 142s ,the Valley Lines 142 refurbishment looked pretty extensive (N.B. I've only seen photos of those). The Merseyrail 142s are probably one of the quintessential examples of somehow making a bad product even worse.
LNWR's ropey 319s between Euston and Watford Junction are a close contender, deafening traction motor thrash, tatty interiors, as they are showing their age...
yeah on FGW 158s the seat bases would collapse with a simple tap and often the springs were damaged which made the seats painfully uncomfortable to sit onThe best 156s were I thought the NorthWest Express ones with the Chapman seating. The Northern Spirit ones had Richmond seats, which lasted only a few years before the bases collapsed.
Worst trains to me are, old BR era units
Clearly you have very short legs then.The interior in the Wales & West 150s is more than perfectly adequate for the duties that both they and the Northern ones undergo (they are reasonably similar).
I've said on here before about 150s but they are horrible and noisy with outdated 3 plus 2 seats and should be replaced ASAP with more 195. I've always liked the 156 and 158 big windows you can see out of and decent enough seats.
I cannot fit my legs comfortably behind the seats of any 150 configuration for more than a few minutes, and I therefore have to sit in the bays.
They really need ironing boards in my opinion. Would reclaim a bit of space and allow me to actually sit in any of the seats!
The 323s have important differences though. They are quiet, accelerate quickly, have fairly spacious seating by the standards of a BR commuter train, plug doors (so they don't slam when passed by an express), and are a comfortable ride, if a little bumpy. The 142s and 150s are none of these things.a bit like 323s are in Manchester
150s have exactly the same windows as 156s. It's just the poor alignment of the seats to them that causes the main issue. While they aren't by the same builder, they are to all intents and purposes just two versions of the same thing - one longer and end-doored and one shorter with doors at thirds.
Ironing boards turn the original as-built layout in a 158 from tight to generous. They do have their uses.
Travelled on the Valley Lines 142's just after they were refurbed and can tell you they transforned them, OK ride was still abit bouncy ( especially come down the valley) but all in good job done. It was a shame that other TOC's couldnt do the same with their.
If you’ll excuse my pedantry, do 150’s and 156’s actually have exactly the same windows? The windows on 156’s look slightly longer and shallower but it may an optical illusion.... Genuine question by the way as I honestly don’t know!
The 72 stock on the Bakerloo wasn't deliberately "retro", it was an earlier and less comprehensive refurbishment than later ones!Never particularly minded some of the older BR stock, 319/321/313 are alright,I wouldn't go out of my way to avoid them. Not had much experience with DMU stock though.
Cannot stand the LU 1973 stock on the Picadilly line. Never understood why they made the interiors so horrible when they could have been lovely and retro like the Bakerloo.
It's unfair to label Pacers the worse are they are very much sui generis to suit the time (i.e. cheap units for local services) that just happened to overstay their welcome.The 323 is the best train in Britain indeed, but that's another thread i am sure
Worst train for me would be... the old LM 150s, they stank of damp during the winter and staggered up the Lickey incline at what seemed to be about 1mp/h.
I think you'll find the 323s do that too, and I love them for itemanates weird noises
It was the DfTs idea I thinkClass 442's.....old wrecks that worst group have tried to get into service on the cheap, but it backfired.
The 323s have important differences though. They are quiet, accelerate quickly, have fairly spacious seating by the standards of a BR commuter train, plug doors (so they don't slam when passed by an express), and are a comfortable ride, if a little bumpy. The 142s and 150s are none of these things.
I have never seen anyone say that they particularly dislike the 323s, or that their heart sinks when one turns up, and as such they are one of my favourite train fleets in the whole of Britain.
The 323s have important differences though. They are quiet, accelerate quickly, have fairly spacious seating by the standards of a BR commuter train, plug doors (so they don't slam when passed by an express), and are a comfortable ride, if a little bumpy. The 142s and 150s are none of these things.
I have never seen anyone say that they particularly dislike the 323s, or that their heart sinks when one turns up, and as such they are one of my favourite train fleets in the whole of Britain.