Uncomfortable seats on newer trains
 

I'm probably not alone in finding seats on trains such as 175s and 185s less comfortbale than the older 158s. As well as new 350s have identical seating to the 185s.

While 175s were intended to be used on shorter routes than Manchester to Milford Haven, 185s were intended to be used on routes such as Manchester Airport to Newcastle as 350s were intended to be used on long distant routes.

This is all to do woth this thing about the newer seats giving better posture for passengers when used, and if you sit in them 'correctly' then they are comfortable.

I like the 175s and they were great when used on the Manchester Airport-Northwest runs, the 185s are good but I am not so sure about them on very long distance (e.g. more than 1 hour). I think te thing with the 185s in my opinionis the fact that they are brightly lighted compared to other units like the 158s.

I think the 185 are very comfortable, I've used them a few times, the longest journey being from Manchester Piccadilly to Darlington. They're a lot more comfortable than some that I've been on, much better than the mk2s we've got on the East Lancs.

Adam

In general I do find seats on newer (Irish) trains to be less comfortable, 2 exceptions to the rule are the 2700 DMU's and the brand new 22000 DMU's, fantastic seats in those.

On the other hand don't get me started about Voyagers and the 0150 ex Holyhead.

You can't beat the passenger railway stock designed and built during the first half of the last century for comfort. It is quite obvious that people, who for a living design seating for modern public transport, never ever travel themselves by that mode of transport. They would all certainly benefit from a visit or three to some of the better heritage railways, where they would soon discover a new and correct meaning for the word "comfortable".

I agree, my favourite for comfort have to be Mk3's. They have a good range of both table and airline seats (not one dominating the other) and the seats are really big.

I think that mk1s are very comfortable,which is good considering that they account for the vast majority of the fleet on most preserved lines!

Adam

I find the seats are harder on newer trains such as 185s. Though, I don’t find the seating on the former Arriva Trains Northern 156s very comfortable. Virgin Trains provide the best seating, but when they run trains from Plymouth to Newcastle I think they need very good seats. Although, with any train someone might be using as part of a long journey, you don’t want to make three 1 hour journeys on Pacer trains one after the other!

In my opinion the problem with these units are that not much space is left between seats around tables, I like the seats and the colour compared to other 156 units but it would be nice if there was a little more legroom.

I think how comfortable you find a train depends on what you’re expecting. For example, the first time I caught a 175 was when I was expecting a 142 or 150. This meant that when I boarded the 175 I was very impressed.

Likewise, when I first caught a 185 I knew the train would be either a 158 or 185, the exterior temperature was about 30oC, this meant that I found the 185 with air conditioning causing a cool temperature on board very refreshing. When I caught a 185 from Blackpool to Manchester, having travelled up to Blackpool on a 156, I found the seats were a bit hard.

I think the seats on units ive tried (185, 350, 222 etc) were very comfy from my point of view. Of course nothing is going to be able to compare to the comfort of a mk3 seat but newer trains aint as bad as people make them out to be

I much prefer the other 156's myself.

Whenever I try to put my head back on a former Arriva 156 I always end up with a sore neck as they have these horrible sticky out bits at the top of the head rests which help remove all support from your neck below.

A perfect example being today I travelled to work on one of the other 156's (you know the ones with the mostly blue + slight greeen interiors).

These have much nicer interiors. They appear to have marginally more legroom and I was even able to relax and drift off slightly before reaching Lime Street whereas tonight I came home on an ex-Arriva 156 and no matter how hard I tried the head rest was just too rigid and uncomfortable for my neck resulting in me having to sit forwards as usual.

Something needs to be done about this maybe they could remove a segment of foam from within the headrest cushion to make them more comfortable?

I also find the former ATN 156s uncomfortable as they have less leg room than the other 156s, so I have to sit with my knees touching the back of the seat in front. Although I am used to travelling on 142s with little leg room. Once when Arriva were running the Transpennine Express franchisee they used one of the ATN 156s on one of the north transpennine routes (I can't remember where it started or finished but it did travel between Leeds and Manchester Piccadilly.) Most of the passengers including myself were unimpressed.

One on occasion wehn I was making a 2 hour journey two 156s joined up arrived to make the journey: a former ATN one and a former FNW one. I didn't hestitate in getting on the former FNW one. The only thing with the former FNW ones is that the carpets are very worn.

Hmmm, try spending a couple of hours on a 375/9. Those seats are bolt upright and rock hard. Such a pity as the other sub-classes of 375s are excellent, but for some reason they decided to make the high-density layout seats nasty. And the aisles are so narrow that the catering trolley has only a few mm on either side. :rolleyes:

It is all about the type and distance the trains are used on for example bus seats are great on 142's because they are desighned to be used on Short Distance Local Stopping Services Like in My areas Liverpool - Wigan, L/pool Wartrington.

High Back seats are great on 150's becuase they are designed for Longer Ditance Services Like L/pool - Manchester Stopping Services / Semi Express.

And High Back seats are good on 156's & 158's because they are designed for Express Services Like L/Pool to Blackpool or Manchester Airport.

These old DMU's with Northern arn't being used as they shold be which is killing them as for the seating to be comfortable it has to be on the train has type of service.

The thing with 185's & 158's s they are BUilt for Express work but really are being pushed to the Limit as trains like Pedaleno's, Voyagers, Medrians, Adalanties which are built for very Long distance services and all have well padded seats and more carriges.

The seating i find is very comfrtable on 185's but when i went to york on one last year i found the enviroment cramped people walking past hiting me accidenlty with bags trying to find there reseved seat this is why they shold have gone for Medrians on these Services as 185's are Just abit small at three cariges for the lengh of the jorney great for L/pool - Manchester Express or Blackpool Express but no good for very Long Distance Services to York etc.

The Same goes for 158's I Traveled on 158 883 recently only Between Hunts Cross and Liverpool Lime Street and found the Seats very comfortable indeed well padded etc but yet i couldent immagine spending five hours on one Between L/Pool and Norwich or even five hours on a 170 which have comfortable seats.

So in practiaclity it is down to the goverment to take all this into account and ensure trains are built and used on what they shold be not using DMU's for Verty LOng Distance Services.

Services from L/pool to Norwich, York , Scaroborogh , and Services from other areas of these Distances need Modern day Locomotives (HST's) or simmler types like Mederains,Voyagers,Pendalino's etc.

Also the seating on the Refurbished Merseyrail 507/508's arnt very comfortable nitehr ok for Just going between crosby and L/Pool CTL etc But to Southport or Chester from L/POOL CTL not a very comfrotable ride.

I never found the 375's that uncomfortable - i've done Cannon street (i think thats where it was) to Hastings and was ok. Also done many a time Chichester to London Victoria (don't ask lol) and was ok although this was on a 377

I agree that most of the 375s are excellent, and way better than the VEP/CEP/CIGs which went before. My point was that it's a shame that the /9 subclass is so awful. They seem to be modelled on the VEP style of high density seeting and narrow aisles.

What are the seats like on Pendalinos as i have yet to ride one of these and am hoping to go to London Next Saturday.

Having spent the past year commuting on 450's & 444's I can confirm this trend of more uncomfortable seating on modern stock.

The reason? Certainly in the case of 450 & 444 its capacity, with 450's by far being the worst. The 450's as I'm sure some of you will know are 5 abreast - two on one side, 3 on the other. Its a nightmare! If you're unfortunate enough to be sitting on a 3 seater arrangement in rush hour you're certain to find the middle person having to lean forward whilst the surrounding two people sit bolt upright. Just check http://www.no450.co.uk/ for an idea.

Stu

Sounds just like Merseytravel 142s then. If your sat on a 3 seater arrangement you have to either stand up or lean forwards trying not to elbow another passenger in order to get out your ticket for inspection.