• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

What to you describe as an "Old Train"?

Status
Not open for further replies.

L401CJF

Established Member
Joined
16 Oct 2019
Messages
1,486
Location
Wirral
Refurbishment of BR stock has given the impression of modernity to many passengers when refurbished stock was introduced some were under the impression it was a new train.
There is a bit of modern stock operating that feels an 'old train' such as the Corby 360's with tatty interiors. I would even dare to include the newer 800's on GWR.
But if you really want to include a really old train then the recently withdrawn former Island Line stock: That WAS old. 313's and 507/508 are in with a shout. Purely age of a train is deceptive like humans as somebody who is aged 25 may look far older and equally somebody who is 50 can look much younger.
Ive think the latest guise on Merseyrail makes the units look a lot more modern than they are.

To get a none enthusiast point of view, last time we went on over to Liverpool I asked the Mrs how old she thought the 507/8s are. She said around 10 years old!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Mally66

Member
Joined
9 Jun 2021
Messages
32
Location
Suffolk
Class 156, 158, 159, 165/166/168. To name but a few. They are just so noisy and imo are past their sell by date. Although in the current economic climate I think they'll be around for a long time to come.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,236
Class 156, 158, 159, 165/166/168. To name but a few. They are just so noisy and imo are past their sell by date. Although in the current economic climate I think they'll be around for a long time to come.
So why the 168s and not 170s?
 
Joined
9 Apr 2011
Messages
317
Location
Over there
The class 92s are now almost 30 years old, and yet they seem quite modern. Unfortunately for me, old trains would be pre-WW2, and I grew up in a railway dominated by steam locomotives, which were all suddenly consigned to the scrap man - whatever the age.

To put this into modern context, if the entire class of 68s were now to be withdrawn and cut up - this would go some way to illustrating what happened to the 9Fs, although the latter class had seven times more individuals than the 68s.

Any trains which run on secondary lines away from London, are old. Down here in cider country we were given 165/166s as 'new' trains for a better service, despite them already having served the Thames Valley routes for 30 years. Who knows, we might get 185s in 2036.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,236
Most of the 170s I've been on seem in a better state of repair than the aforementioned
Interesting, TY. The 168s have always seemed well maintained and cared for to me.

The class 92s are now almost 30 years old, and yet they seem quite modern. Unfortunately for me, old trains would be pre-WW2, and I grew up in a railway dominated by steam locomotives, which were all suddenly consigned to the scrap man - whatever the age.

To put this into modern context, if the entire class of 68s were now to be withdrawn and cut up - this would go some way to illustrating what happened to the 9Fs, although the latter class had seven times more individuals than the 68s.

Any trains which run on secondary lines away from London, are old. Down here in cider country we were given 165/166s as 'new' trains for a better service, despite them already having served the Thames Valley routes for 30 years. Who knows, we might get 185s in 2036.
Twas ever thus though. Even in the steam era branch lines had cascaded stock.
 

QSK19

Member
Joined
29 Dec 2020
Messages
670
Location
Leicestershire
Most of EMR’s Regional fleet until all the 170s have moved across. This is reflected by the fact that, in a table I saw recently ranking each TOC’s average fleet age, excluding Merseyrail and TfW - which are getting their shiny new trains in due course - I think EMR came in at second behind Chiltern.

Even once all the 170s have moved over, a sizeable chunk of the fleet will be deemed old trains - retention of 158s for Nottingham-Liverpool reflecting that.

Come 10-15 years’ time, the 170s and 360s of EMR’s future iteration will be seen as old (by that point being 30+ years old), therefore propelling the East Midlands back up the average fleet age rankings.
 

ash39

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2012
Messages
1,505
You can easily make a train appear much newer than it actually is with a deep clean/refurb, and on the opposite end of the spectrum a knackered looking train can look much older. I think people also view the more spartan rolling stock as 'older', purely as it is less comfortable to travel on.

A freshly painted/refurbished Class 158 could probably pass for a 10 year old train. A tired Class 321 could probably pass for a 40 year old train. Despite the former being older!
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,236
You can easily make a train appear much newer than it actually is with a deep clean/refurb, and on the opposite end of the spectrum a knackered looking train can look much older. I think people also view the more spartan rolling stock as 'older', purely as it is less comfortable to travel on.

A freshly painted/refurbished Class 158 could probably pass for a 10 year old train. A tired Class 321 could probably pass for a 40 year old train. Despite the former being older!
The thrust is true enough - well cared for rolling stock feels newer (e.g. C2C's 357s seem decent despite being 20 years old) - albeit that l believe 158s and 321s were actually built in parallel.

Of course, to tap back into earlier posts in the thread, a 158 is (theoretically!) air-conditioned whereas a 321 (other than Renatus) has opening windows. They were also designed for rather different roles.
 

Trainfan2019

Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
452
You can easily make a train appear much newer than it actually is with a deep clean/refurb, and on the opposite end of the spectrum a knackered looking train can look much older. I think people also view the more spartan rolling stock as 'older', purely as it is less comfortable to travel on.

A freshly painted/refurbished Class 158 could probably pass for a 10 year old train. A tired Class 321 could probably pass for a 40 year old train. Despite the former being older!
True about the 158s but because I know they were first introduced in the proper British Rail era, they'll feel an old train to me. Although a much nicer old train than the 156s.
 

Gloster

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
8,600
Location
Up the creek
It would have to be something from before I became seriously interested in rolling-stock and the way the railway functioned, rather than just train spotting and gannet-like grabbing any bit of information. As I can remember making a special trip to the GN-lines to see the 313 when they were introduced, this doesn’t leave me much now my local 483 have gone. Other than a few diesel locos which still potter about, there is only the HST and that really doesn’t look old.
 

ash39

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2012
Messages
1,505
Of course, to tap back into earlier posts in the thread, a 158 is (theoretically!) air-conditioned whereas a 321 (other than Renatus) has opening windows. They were also designed for rather different roles.

Yes that's the point I was making - nice (comfy seats, tables, air con) tends to be thought of as 'newer" by the general travelling public. Thereby two trains from the same era canbe perceived quite differently.
 

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,375
Location
N Yorks
Call me a dinosaur but seeing trains I saw coming into use going for scrap is quite a jolt.
Class 312 seemed old - slam doors etc. While a 317 was seen as quite modern
That still makes a train old or not. But thats just me

Trains could go on for a long time. Refurb cam make a tired train seem new, but you also have to refurb the clever bits under the floor, and the body shells, as well as tarting up the passenger areas. I suppose the tome comes when the maintenance starts to creep up in cost, and thats when they should go. Says he with a 2010 reg car!
 

357 LTSRail

Member
Joined
28 Jan 2020
Messages
63
Location
Essex
Openable windows / no aircon / operated under BR etc
Spot on. Air conditioning should be a given on a train in the 21st century.

An exception for me is that I don’t quite consider Networkers to be old trains yet but they’re getting very close to it.

So I suppose 30 years old is roughly when a train becomes truly old. 20 years is when they start feeling dated.
 

Milo T.K

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2018
Messages
261
For me it's when a unit hits around 35 years old. Can't believe the electrostars and turbostars are hitting 25 almost however
 

Wivenswold

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2012
Messages
1,478
Location
Essex
Sorry to be so literal but "anything that's no longer in service". I appreciate there are plenty of examples going back to long before British Rail days where "no longer in service" can happen to relatively modern trains but point and ask what those 379s are at Crown Point and I'll say "they're the old trains".
 

boiledbeans2

Member
Joined
15 Oct 2020
Messages
517
Location
UK
150s and 153s. Now the Pacers are gone, those two classes are looking very dated.
The refurbished TfW 153s look rather new, once onboard, and you can't see the exterior 80s design.

Same for the SWR 455s.
 

satisnek

Member
Joined
5 Sep 2014
Messages
903
Location
Kidderminster/Mercia Marina
I would say that pre-1970s is 'old' because of the style of interior fitout. A 1950s Mk1 looked 'old' in the 1980s and I'm sure that a 1920s carriage would have looked 'old' in the 1950s. But from the 1970s onwards, white or off-white plastic panelling is white or off-white plastic panelling, regardless of age. This was proved a while back when some 35-year-old Class 313s were tarted up and put into service on the Coastway lines - people thought that they were new trains (albeit rather basic ones with no toilets). Apart from maybe becoming more plasticky, I don't think passenger rolling stock has really changed in the last half-century and probably never will in the future.
 

cambsy

On Moderation
Joined
6 Oct 2011
Messages
911
To me, an old train, is as much the look and feel , as it is the actual age, take for example, the GWR Castle sets, which are based on the 40 plus year old, HST, but with refurbishment and things like PIS inside, can feel modern, though obviously if one looks closely , there’s things which bely its age, then take a BR later generation, 153 or 156, or now gone pacer etc, which to me feel older and worse traveling environment, than the older HST Castle Sets.

The properly old trains to me are,Mk1 or Mk2’s, and locos, like of course steam, but also the older generation diesels, like the 37’s-20’s-33’s-31’s-86’s, etc, then there’s the, medium age trains, like Mk3’s, 56-58’s-60’s -87’s etc, then the modern trains, which too many to really list.

My rule of thumb for age of trains, is say, anything built more than few years, before the HST. Is i would class old train, then medium age, is HST-87’s, to BR Sprinters-Pacers, MK3 based EMU’s and built, around 40 to 20 years ago, then modern is 20 years old to right up to today, these age brackets to me, are very subjective, and the boundaries are blurred, as one goes from medium age to Modern, as technology which makes modern, might just have appeared in medium age trains.
 

plugwash

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2015
Messages
1,580
Perhaps it's my age, but at least as far as commuter/regional stock used in the GM area goes I would say there is a sharp difference between 1980s stock and 1990s stock. A 158 feels far more modern than a 156. A 323 feels far more modern than a 319.
 

anamyd

On Moderation
Joined
17 Aug 2018
Messages
3,011
I sometimes struggle to believe Class 390s are over 20 years old!
Only 8 of the vehicles in each of some of the first 52 of the remaining units are, with the 9th vehicle in each of all of those being 18 years old, and the 10th and 11th vehicles in the 11-cars of those (and the entire 4 extra 11-car units) being 10-13 years old.
 

MattRat

On Moderation
Joined
26 May 2021
Messages
2,077
Location
Liverpool
To be deemed modern, I'd say that a train needs windows that don't open (always comes with aircon), have 2+2 seating, wifi, PIS, all that modern electronic stuff, and preferably be electric or at least bi-mode.

Anything not designed like that feels old.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,236
To be deemed modern, I'd say that a train needs windows that don't open (always comes with aircon), have 2+2 seating, wifi, PIS, all that modern electronic stuff, and preferably be electric or at least bi-mode.

Anything not designed like that feels old.
2+2 seating? So a whole swathe of trains in the South East ruled out on a wholly ridiculous basis. Wonderful.
 

satisnek

Member
Joined
5 Sep 2014
Messages
903
Location
Kidderminster/Mercia Marina
Perhaps it's my age, but at least as far as commuter/regional stock used in the GM area goes I would say there is a sharp difference between 1980s stock and 1990s stock. A 158 feels far more modern than a 156. A 323 feels far more modern than a 319.
This is what I was getting at when I said "more plasticky". There is certainly a lot more aluminium trim on 1980s stock.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top