Most Comfortable LU Stock

Matloughe: normally we don't go for this sort of survey on the forum, but if you are using it as research for some sort of project then GREAT. I hope as many members as possible will help you by giving their votes.

So: no deletion - officially approved survey.

Edit: we'll sticky this for seven days, then get rid of it, so have your say folks

A or 72.

Sam

For the purposes of research, I think a lot to do with 'A' stocks popularity is the transverse seating. Not that many stocks have this any more. The most uncomfortable have to be 92, as the back rest is at a 90 deg angle to the squab.

They would get my second choice, I managed to fall to sleep on one a few weeks ago (falling to sleep on the move is something that doesn't come easily for me!), and thanks to the DVA going off I managed to wake up where I wanted to get off.

A stock are about the only trains in the UK now that have properly sprung seats, so they get my vote.

I do not see the former Metropolitan 'T' and 'Steam' Stock First Class Compartments downgraded for universal use mentioned in the poll. :-)

I didn't Put 'T' Stock or the Pullman Carriages on as they will not be of any use to me in my project, to be perfectly honest.
No Offense, but in A2 Geography everything must be there for a reason. I wrote a 205 page essay for ICT last year... and failed miserably. lol.

Matloughe

Although I've voted for the 'A' stock, their sprung seats (similar to older and now withdrawn EMU/DMU's & CO/CP & R stocks) are a bit of a double edged sword. Firstly you are liable to bounce all over the place when traveling fast over points/rough track and secondly for those people who do have bad backs (which I have suffered with from time to time) I think that the firmer seats, particularly in the refurbed 73 stock units are far more suitable - note also that the 60 stock were built to take commuters perhaps on the longest daily commutes on the underground (Amersham and other termini to the city) and consequently had to provide some level of comfort.

Its also interesting to note that the 'C' stock lost their sprung seats (at least thats the kind of seat that I can remember them having) during the 1992/93 refurb programme, whilst the 'A' stock managed to keep theirs.

The 92 stock units are by far the worst in my opinion (the referbed 'C' stock aren't much better) and a thorough refurb/redesign/rebuild is already long overdue even though they're less than 14 years old - to me they seem to have been designed to get as many people crammed into them as possible, at the expense of comfort.

Hope my comments are of assistance & best of luck with the project


Regards

Christopher

As a matter of interest. Did you submit your 205 pages electronically or on paper?

CSLR i hand wrote my ICT coursework as my ICT teacher would not allow the use of word-processed documents.

Chris W: i have noted your comments. Thanks alot, that was just the sort of opinion i was looking for.

Lol, lets hope i don't fail this one... lol.

RE: Bad back trouble.............. I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the very lively ride of the 72's north of Queens Park, Ouchhh!!!

Does anyone have any opinions yet on whether the S or 2009 stocks are going to be the more comfortable?