Poll: Which stock is the best for long distance travel? 2 votes each!

[whole diary]

[vacman]

Alright, which four lunatics voted for Voyagers  ;  )

probably all sectioned under the mental healh act by now

I hope so, these people are walking the streets!!

[shadow]

First vote: Voyagers! I know that'll proberberbly make me mad, but i like the voyagers.
Second vote...i think i forgot to do it.

Theres nothing wrong with the Voyagers.

[Conner]

First vote: Voyagers! I know that'll proberberbly make me mad, but i like the voyagers.
Second vote...i think i forgot to do it.

Theres nothing wrong with the Voyagers.

I wouldn't go that far but they aren't as bad as people make out.
They are just a bit short and have retention tanks on the toilets.
Solve those two and they would be good trains.

[Phil]

There are lots of things I really, really like about Voyagers.

The smell unfortunately isn't one of them - and I'm not talking of trouble in't toilets, I mean the all-pervading smell of damp carpets, particularly in 1st Class.

Sadly I am damned with a particularly acute sniffer, and I genuinely avoid using Voyagers where possible because of it.

Mind you, for a long time in the early days of HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) I'd avoid using them as well because the smell when braking made me gag - I don't seem to notice that so much these days.

[Shazz]

Once again, theres nothing wrong with voyagers. For me they beat a refurb'd hst without even trying.

[dog box]

Once again, theres nothing wrong with voyagers. For me they beat a refurb'd hst without even trying.
[/quote

What???.........Voyagers are 1 Smelly, 2 Noisy, 3 Claustrophobic, 4 Dingy ,5 Uncomfortable. 6 Small, 7 Always overcrowded and 8 the staff who work them hate the things

[Shazz]

Once again, theres nothing wrong with voyagers. For me they beat a refurb'd hst without even trying.

What???.........Voyagers are 1 Smelly, 2 Noisy, 3 Claustrophobic, 4 Dingy ,5 Uncomfortable. 6 Small, 7 Always overcrowded and 8 the staff who work them hate the things

Sounds more like an average mk3 to me...

Anyway, i'm entitled to my own opinion, and its not changeing because its now how you want it.

Plus, i get legroom on a voyager, and i certainly don't on a refurb'd mk3.

[devon_metro]

I find Voyager legroom insulting, unlike refurb HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train). I don't see where people are getting the idea that the new mk3s have no legroom, unless some seats have more/less room 

[dog box]

The refurb MK3 have much more legroom than unrefurb, you may have problems if you are 6 ft 5 or so, but any person below that height can easily stretch there legs right out under the seat in front, dont say you cant as i did this  very thing about 2 hrs ago and i am about 6 ft tall.

[Doctor Gideon Ceefax]

The main issues with voyagers is the incessant rattling and the fact that they are too short, and full of wasted space hence overcrowding. There appears to be a large amount of cupboards for electrical equipment and excessive provision of disabled bogs.

I personally find the seating on them very very uncomfortable after about 45 minutes or so (assuming you can get a seat). However this is more to do with personal preference, they seem very upright and hard, but probably are designed to adopt a more healthier pose than the old Mark III seats which were much more like sinking into your sofa. There also seems to be a fair few seats which don't line up with windows, admittadley BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) refurbishments of Mark IIIs started this, but the voyagers seem far worse for this. The buffet car (or shop) as they like to call it seems far far more cramped than the old Mark II and Mark III buffets.

Staff accommodation on the things is crap. leading to staffr banning passengers standing in some vestibules so they have somewhere to stand!

On the longer routes where there is no increase in frequency, e.g. Bournemouth, services via Coventry, Yorkshire or Scottish services the things are viciously overcrowded, and often cannot cope. Note how Virgin used to hire out HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) and XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) are bringing them back.

As for the refurbished HSTs, they are less comfortable and pleasant than the old seating, but aren't anywhere near as bad as Voyagers. I don't really think Great Western had much choice, it was the only way they could increase seats, and they seem to have done a half decent job of it for solo travellers and commuters. I've not tried London to Penzance on them yet, but for London to Bristol, they are perfectly acceptable.

[shadow]

I am about 6 foot, and i definatly prefer the voyager legroom to the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) (but that's my personal opinion)
Overcrowding: ok, does get crowded sometimes, but so does FGW^▸ (First Great Western). There is more room between the carrages in a voyagerthat you can camp yourself in if they are crowded.

and i've somehow managed to turn this thread into a talk about the voyager class, so i am sorry

They've got to have the large amount of cupboards for electrical equipment, because each carrage has the same kit in it, to draw power from the engine/generator/or from another carrage if the engine is not functioning properly. then there's all the fuse thingys, and the engine control systems.
And as the buffets on the mark 3 (and i guess mark 2) take up half a carrage on an HST. of course the shops on the voyagers are going to be cramped...the RSM in the shop on the voyagers always does a good job in my books.

[Shazz]

I am about 6 foot, and i definatly prefer the voyager legroom to the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) (but that's my personal opinion)
Overcrowding: ok, does get crowded sometimes, but so does FGW^▸ (First Great Western). There is more room between the carrages in a voyagerthat you can camp yourself in if they are crowded.

Likewise. I'm 6ft. And i get so much more legroom in a voyager than i do in a mk3 of either type

[Graz]

I find Voyagers fine for long distance just as long as they're not crowded. They're speedy and fairly quiet, nice big clean windows to look out of too (probably the best windows out of all, I'd say). I'm also 6 ft and don't have any issues regarding legroom... Can be a little bumpy when going over points, but I really enjoy going on them.

I like HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) too, but I have to say I preferred them before the refurb. I'd also happily be on a class 158 for long distance if it wasn't too busy (and especially if it wasn't a tatty old alphaline one!), same with a 159.

[vacman]

umm it's actually a fact that there's more legroom in a MKIII! i'm even going to measure them both tomorow to prove it!

[Chris from Nailsea]

Personally, I thought about a long distance journey that I might do (Bristol to Paddington, for example?), and so I voted for, Mk3 not refurb, and Mk3 refresh.

Now, to avoid my posting loads of quotes here in an attempt to justify my choice, for simplicity I'll just say:

I agree with previous posts by qprrule, vacman, devon_metro (what, no bins?) and woody (yes, I'm a commuter) on this one!

Vacman, I agree, there's nothing wrong with 158s - but not for the 'long distance travel' I'm considering here - and there is a bit more legroom on a Mk3 (from personal experience, not using a tape measure!) and I'm 6 ft as well!

However, this is just my personal view?  Let the debate continue!