Class 156 DMU vs Class 158 DMU - Which Is The Better DMU?

[scotraildmu]

Hello all, I was just wondering if people prefer the class 156 or 158 and if anyone has any interesting comparisons or facts about either of the units, I have only ever been on a 156 but I'd like to go on a 158 soon.

 

[notadriver]

The 158 has a/c and goes faster

 

[scotraildmu]

The 158 has a/c and goes faster

True, but I think the 156 has a more powerful engine relative to its weight and it has superior acceleration to the 158.
However, the 158 is definitely more comfortable.

 

[hexagon789]

True, but I think the 156 has a more powerful engine relative to its weight and it has superior acceleration to the 158.
However, the 158 is definitely more comfortable.

Power-to-weight (ignoring transmission losses etc):

156 - 7.6hp per tonne
158 - 9.1hp per tonne

Acceleration 0-60mph

156 - 124s
158 - 98s

Nevertheless while 158s are undoubtedly more comfortable, I have a soft spot for 156s and find them much more characterful

 

[notadriver]

156s definitely have character. When leaving Middlesbrough, the driver seems to have full power once clear of the 25 mph limit, most of the way to the next stop at Thornaby.

 

[175001]

No other DMU coughs if you take too much notch of power than the 156. That's character.

But 158s get my vote. Far superior.

 

[LRV3004]

I prefer a 156 myself, but then again they were built by Metro Cammell who also built the extremely successful Class 101s!

 

[Towers]

I've always thought the 158 a superb train. To this day they still offer just about the best ride on the network, and when used on the right sort of routes they're close to unrivalled for comfort, too. The 1980s A/C is their obvious weak point, but as SWT demonstrated, that can be sorted!

I like the 156s, but just as with the 150s it's quite apparent that they're of an earlier design era than the 158s.

 

[Trainfan2019]

Class 158 always my preference over the 156. Comfy ride and quieter.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Hello all, I was just wondering if people prefer the class 156 or 158 and if anyone has any interesting comparisons or facts about either of the units, I have only ever been on a 156 but I'd like to go on a 158 soon.

158s are faster, nicer interiors, have air con and ride well as Towers highlighted. They could do with charging points and wifi included on the whole fleet with different TOCs, but the difference between them shows because they were designed for an intercity spec and 156s were not.

 

[SteveM70]

I have a soft spot for the 156s, mainly because it reminds me of trips up the WHL, but compared to the 158s they’re noisy and uncomfortable.

It’s just a shame the aircon on the 158s is so fragile (or is it that Newton Heath’s finest haven’t figured it out yet?), and also the refurb programme has got rid of the super comfy seats in the middle carriage of the three car sets

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The 156 had an easier introduction than the 158, which suffered from unreliability and a number of niggles in the first decade.
But they are both fine workhorses, unfortunately mostly as single 2-car units (there were some 3-car 158/9).
The 158s seem to have had better upgrades than the 156s (thinking of TfWs 158s vs Northern's 156s).
They are both rather cramped when busy, compared to say a newer 175 or 195, but better than 150/14x.
The aircon on 158s has never worked properly in hot weather (none on 156), and the external PIS on both is very poor with the split gangway area.
158s have better soundproofing, but are subject to vibration if you sit over the engines.

 

[Anonymous10]

I have a soft spot for the 156s, mainly because it reminds me of trips up the WHL, but compared to the 158s they’re noisy and uncomfortable.

It’s just a shame the aircon on the 158s is so fragile (or is it that Newton Heath’s finest haven’t figured it out yet?), and also the refurb programme has got rid of the super comfy seats in the middle carriage of the three car sets

the 158s are much nicer air con is a problem with most 158s swt have sorted it i believe tfw is trying to i but for interior spec nothing comes close to the tfw units extremely comfy seats good leg room in seat usb and i believe plugs plenty of luggage space interior doors and reliable wifi whats there not to like ?

 

[berwicksfinest]

Kinda of an irrelevant poll as both designed for a different role, both of which they do very well and have done for years.

Like comparing a Ford KA and a Mondeo for road use

 

[py_megapixel]

The 158s are reasonably comfortable, even in 2021. In fact, I'd pick one over an IC125 <ducks for a cover>.

The 156s feel like they're falling to pieces, and seem incapable of leaving a station without deafening everyone in the vicinity. They should be consigned to the scrap-heap as soon as possible.

 

[route101]

Class 156s have been the staple of traction ive used. Venerable I would describe them. Class 158s I prefer over 170s/166s etc.

Hello all, I was just wondering if people prefer the class 156 or 158 and if anyone has any interesting comparisons or facts about either of the units, I have only ever been on a 156 but I'd like to go on a 158 soon.

Should be able to get a ride on a 158 out of Queen St.

 

[scotraildmu]

Power-to-weight (ignoring transmission losses etc):

156 - 7.6hp per tonne
158 - 9.1hp per tonne

Acceleration 0-60mph

156 - 124s
158 - 98s

Nevertheless while 158s are undoubtedly more comfortable, I have a soft spot for 156s and find them much more characterful

You're right, I was including transmission losses.

The 158s are reasonably comfortable, even in 2021. In fact, I'd pick one over an IC125 <ducks for a cover>.

The 156s feel like they're falling to pieces, and seem incapable of leaving a station without deafening everyone in the vicinity. They should be consigned to the scrap-heap as soon as possible.

The condition of the 156 depends on when it was last refurbished and the operator, I recently was on a ScotRail 156 and it was inevitably loud but swift leaving stations and the ride quality is decent around 50-60mph.

156s definitely have character. When leaving Middlesbrough, the driver seems to have full power once clear of the 25 mph limit, most of the way to the next stop at Thornaby.

No other DMU coughs if you take too much notch of power than the 156. That's character.

But 158s get my vote. Far superior.

Yes, I guess the 156 are older and were designed to be simple and conservative instead of having all of the comfortable features of the 158

I prefer a 156 myself, but then again they were built by Metro Cammell who also built the extremely successful Class 101s!

I also prefer the 156 because of its sheer versatility.

I've always thought the 158 a superb train. To this day they still offer just about the best ride on the network, and when used on the right sort of routes they're close to unrivalled for comfort, too. The 1980s A/C is their obvious weak point, but as SWT demonstrated, that can be sorted!

I like the 156s, but just as with the 150s it's quite apparent that they're of an earlier design era than the 158s.

Completly, but I like the fact that the 156s are old but if I wanted a comfortable ride I'd choose the 158 for sure.

 

[scotraildmu]

158s are faster, nicer interiors, have air con and ride well as Towers highlighted. They could do with charging points and wifi included on the whole fleet with different TOCs, but the difference between them shows because they were designed for an intercity spec and 156s were not.

I have a soft spot for the 156s, mainly because it reminds me of trips up the WHL, but compared to the 158s they’re noisy and uncomfortable.

It’s just a shame the aircon on the 158s is so fragile (or is it that Newton Heath’s finest haven’t figured it out yet?), and also the refurb programme has got rid of the super comfy seats in the middle carriage of the three car sets

The 2 DMUs were designed for different things, the 156 is more versatile while 158 is more comfy and quiet.

 

[py_megapixel]

I also prefer the 156 because of its sheer versatility.

They're too slow for long distance expresses, and too inefficient boarding for frequent-stop commuter routes. Where they're really good is the long spindly rural branches. They do quite a good job of that up in Scotland, and in other places such as the Cumbrian Coast, but I wouldn't say they're that much more versatile compared to a 158.

 

[scotraildmu]

I've always thought the 158 a superb train. To this day they still offer just about the best ride on the network, and when used on the right sort of routes they're close to unrivalled for comfort, too. The 1980s A/C is their obvious weak point, but as SWT demonstrated, that can be sorted!

I like the 156s, but just as with the 150s it's quite apparent that they're of an earlier design era than the 158s.

Completly, but I like the fact that the 156s are old but if I wanted a comfortable ride I'd choose the 158 for sure.

The 156 had an easier introduction than the 158, which suffered from unreliability and a number of niggles in the first decade.
But they are both fine workhorses, unfortunately mostly as single 2-car units (there were some 3-car 158/9).
The 158s seem to have had better upgrades than the 156s (thinking of TfWs 158s vs Northern's 156s).
They are both rather cramped when busy, compared to say a newer 175 or 195, but better than 150/14x.
The aircon on 158s has never worked properly in hot weather (none on 156), and the external PIS on both is very poor with the split gangway area.
158s have better soundproofing, but are subject to vibration if you sit over the engines.

The 156 could do with more upgrades and refurbs but it has demonstrated reliability and persistence for a long time in spite of operators using it on some challenging routes because it is so versatile.

 

[JonathanH]

They could do with charging points and wifi included on the whole fleet

Only Northern left to complete the charging point roll out now? Oh, and SWR.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Only Northern left to complete the charging point roll out now?

Yep, but they are quite a significant operator of them now and a lot of the 156s are getting them first for stoppers where most journeys are less than hour.

 

[scotraildmu]

They're too slow for long distance expresses, and too inefficient boarding for frequent-stop commuter routes. Where they're really good is the long spindly rural branches. They do quite a good job of that up in Scotland, and in other places such as the Cumbrian Coast, but I wouldn't say they're that much more versatile compared to a 158.

I have ridden the 156s mainly on the west highland line so I have only experienced them on rural lines, I agree that they are not good for use as commuter trains on busy routes though.

 

[AlastairFraser]

The 2 DMUs were designed for different things, the 156 is more versatile while 158 is more comfy and quiet.

Versatile - not really. They're slow and get in the way on the mainline, so only really suit branch lines.
They were designed for different things, yes, but the 158s are better for most services that 156s currently operated.
They're a decent stop gap till electrification with battery units on more busy branches and lighter used branches.

 

[Paul Jones 88]

I've only been on 156 once, back in about 1997 and I was quite impressed by it, at the time I thought that the same body shell would have been great for making new Southern Railway EMUs.
I have used 158s on SWT services out of Waterloo, they really were 158s and not 159s as I noticed the number.
Again an impressive train and comfortable, however 156 wins for me for the opening windows.

 

[TXMISTA]

the 158s are much nicer air con is a problem with most 158s swt have sorted it i believe tfw is trying to i but for interior spec nothing comes close to the tfw units extremely comfy seats good leg room in seat usb and i believe plugs plenty of luggage space interior doors and reliable wifi whats there not to like ?

I would disagree about TfW’s interior spec. I think that GWR and SWR’s spec is superior, especially the thick seats

 

[jaketaylor]

IMO it has to be a 158! I prefer the 1587xx and 1589xx batch as this is basically what I’ve grown up with! However I don’t dislike the 156s just personal opinion is the 158s!
If we’re talking liveries Northern Spirit for 156s & TPE for 158s!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would disagree about TfW’s interior spec. I think that GWR and SWR’s spec is superior, especially the thick seats

I'd go with anything with Grammer seating, or contoured ironing boards as a second choice. The original seats (as GWR and SWR have) make very poor use of space and result in very tight legroom indeed.

 

[Fleetwoodflyer]

Hello all, I was just wondering if people prefer the class 156 or 158 and if anyone has any interesting comparisons or facts about either of the units, I have only ever been on a 156 but I'd like to go on a 158 soon.

My personal preference is for the 156s, especially when they are well looked after. I agree that the 158s have some pluses but they are best avoided in hot weather especially if you need to wear a mask.

 

[scotraildmu]

My personal preference is for the 156s, especially when they are well looked after. I agree that the 158s have some pluses but they are best avoided in hot weather especially if you need to wear a mask.

Agreed!