Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2015 18:46:13 GMT
Good day to you all. Having used bus services in several towns and cities outside and well outside London, I have discovered well padded seats. The padding on seats on London's buses seems almost non existent by comparison. I am guessing it is the hardness of the seats which leads to some passengers preferring to stand, even on a half-empty vehicle. The only reasonable seats I have found in London are those on the rather swanky single deckers used on Route 203. How did this route manage to avoid being lumbered with the awful Enviro 200's where the legroom offered by the second set of seats from the front on the nearside - seats set aside for those less able to stand - is barely enough for the average fit person to sit down comfortably.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 27, 2015 20:08:16 GMT
Good day to you all. Having used bus services in several towns and cities outside and well outside London, I have discovered well padded seats. The padding on seats on London's buses seems almost non existent by comparison. I am guessing it is the hardness of the seats which leads to some passengers preferring to stand, even on a half-empty vehicle. The only reasonable seats I have found in London are those on the rather swanky single deckers used on Route 203. How did this route manage to avoid being lumbered with the awful Enviro 200's where the legroom offered by the second set of seats from the front on the nearside - seats set aside for those less able to stand - is barely enough for the average fit person to sit down comfortably. Welcome to the 'I hate the Enviro 200's seating layout' club - they are truly awful. The legroom when sitting in the rear seats is horrendous, especially when compared to a Streetlite which fits more seats in overall but still manages to have adequate legroom. The 203 uses Citaro's which a lot of people tend to find really comfortable
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Apr 27, 2015 20:14:46 GMT
Try using the EDs on the W19 the legroom is the worst. The short OSs on W12 are also bad for legroom.
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Apr 27, 2015 20:26:12 GMT
Route X26's Citaro seats are great. They are very relaxing and comfortable to get on especially after arriving back at a busy Heathrow and having a long trek back to Croydon. I always get a nice nap on those buses when I come back from holiday.
A's commercial Enviro 400s have incredible leather seats. Had the pleasure of using them when they were on rail replacement in West Croydon last year.
Also, the MMCs have good enough seats far more comfortable than it's predecessor.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 27, 2015 21:27:39 GMT
The short OSs on W12 are also bad for legroom. I found these to be nice and decent for legroom along with other London Solos. I've not used the ED's yet so no comment
|
|
|
Post by westhamgeezer on Apr 27, 2015 21:43:51 GMT
I find Scania Omnicity's the worst, horrible gave me right back ache tonight
|
|
|
Post by Hassaan on Apr 27, 2015 22:25:44 GMT
Good day to you all. Having used bus services in several towns and cities outside and well outside London, I have discovered well padded seats. The padding on seats on London's buses seems almost non existent by comparison. I am guessing it is the hardness of the seats which leads to some passengers preferring to stand, even on a half-empty vehicle. The only reasonable seats I have found in London are those on the rather swanky single deckers used on Route 203. How did this route manage to avoid being lumbered with the awful Enviro 200's where the legroom offered by the second set of seats from the front on the nearside - seats set aside for those less able to stand - is barely enough for the average fit person to sit down comfortably. Seat padding is there, just it is often quite hard when new, becoming softer over time. Harder padding lasts longer which is important for the level of usage that buses get in London. The only proper rock hard seats I've found are on the 62-reg Gemini 2's at Putney garage, which have always been like that, and on some Scania OmniCity buses, although they did have that little bit of padding when new that has now just become flat. Even the much hated Urban 90s and Esteban Ciclo had that little bit of padding when new. Being only 5ft 7 I find the E200 legroom ok.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 27, 2015 23:34:22 GMT
I find Scania Omnicity's the worst, horrible gave me right back ache tonight The terrible suspension really doesn't help though there was one unrefurbed Scania at PD last year which seemed to have a really nice suspension as the journey on the 96 wasn't bouncy at all for a change
|
|
|
Post by Green Kitten on Apr 28, 2015 0:24:45 GMT
It of course depends on the bus. As much as I'm partial to the grand OmniCity, the seats on certain examples are absolutely abysmal. Thankfully London United also realised this and gave some them some much-needed padding. OmniCities, in their defense, make up for the poor seats with great legroom! The seats are the only thing I dislike about OmniCities. The worst seating goes to the awful AF B9TL Gemini 2s (and the not-so-awful hybrid Gemini 2s). I'm also not a big fan of Enviro200s. Some of them have the 'legroom-seat' (the second row from the back on the right where the emergency exit is) where I always like to sit, as it's not very comfortable for me anywhere else. Route 203 got 'swanky' buses - I suppose full-sized 12m buses were needed for extra capacity (Enviro200s are 10.8m at the longest, at least in London). I do wish more single-deck routes got full-sized buses, instead of this massive barage of Enviro200s... boring! The choice of seating depends on the operator too. There's different types of seats (I don't really remember the names). It's a general consensus that the Lazzarini (?) seats found on most Stagecoach buses and all Abellio buses are the most comfortable...
|
|
|
Post by l1group on Apr 28, 2015 0:24:52 GMT
I find Scania Omnicity 's the worst, horrible gave me right back ache tonight The terrible suspension really doesn't help though there was one unrefurbed Scania at PD last year which seemed to have a really nice suspension as the journey on the 96 wasn't bouncy at all for a change The Scania Omnicity is becoming more bearable, or I'm getting used to them. Speed cancels half of the suspension effect on SPs, I feel, as I've felt on the N9. It also means less heavy vibrations. The E3 (and other LU) refurbishments had decent padding, but that padding is starting to sink now (and I wasn't surprised considering the demographics of the E3, and connotations behind leftover jeans). On the other hand, Metroline SELs are so unbearable, I hate them. With the addition of bad experiences on them, of course. Albeit it's more to do with the body, suspension etc etc... The comparable Go-Ahead examples are better, somehow. Seat padding is there, just it is often quite hard when new, becoming softer over time. Harder padding lasts longer which is important for the level of usage that buses get in London. The only proper rock hard seats I've found are on the 62-reg Gemini 2's at Putney garage, which have always been like that, and on some Scania OmniCity buses, although they did have that little bit of padding when new that has now just become flat. Even the much hated Urban 90s and Esteban Ciclo had that little bit of padding when new. Being only 5ft 7 I find the E200 legroom ok. The Urban 90s are bad, yes, but the Esteban Ciclo seats are the only seats where it seems that the seat bottoms actually come off, as I found out on a DE on the 72 when I (nearly) slid off my seat with the seat bottom not being attached to the seat frame! It felt like I was sitting on cardboard. I rarely found any padding on the Scania Omnicity when new, weirdly. Enviro 200s I find slightly tight (as being 5ft something), but the emergency exit door (on non-ECWTA buses) seat has fairly good legroom! Tower Transit/Metroline West/London General-NP ex-First London VN/VW/WVNs (Gemini 2) seem to have fairly soft seats which I don't mind, and weirdly find decent. Until you actually sink into them. Oh, and it's nearly obvious if you ride the X26, at least one person is having a nap. I once slept between Kingston-Croydon, and another time Kingston-Hatton Cross. But I seem to be able to sleep in most buses except SELs. I don't know why.
|
|
|
Post by l1group on Apr 28, 2015 0:29:20 GMT
I'm also not a big fan of Enviro200s. Some of them have the 'legroom-seat' (the second row from the back on the right where the emergency exit is) where I always like to sit, as it's not very comfortable for me anywhere else. Route 203 got 'swanky' buses - I suppose full-sized 12m buses were needed for extra capacity (Enviro200s are 10.8m at the longest, at least in London). I do wish more single-deck routes got full-sized buses, instead of this massive barage of Enviro200s... boring! Or get single decker hybrids(!) E200s can get up to 11.3m, afaik, but TfL being TfL mean the longest E200s are 10.8m. The 203 does need more than what was said with the frequency it has - it can get very full as I experienced a few times between Hatton and Hounslow. So it's rare I end up sitting in those Citaros. *Wonders how hard the seats on the VHs for the 285 will be. Fairly is my guess.*
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 28, 2015 1:40:39 GMT
I remember when the 148 had SELs just before the Omnicities, they had leather seats which were really comfortable!
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 28, 2015 1:55:55 GMT
I'm also not a big fan of Enviro200s. Some of them have the 'legroom-seat' (the second row from the back on the right where the emergency exit is) where I always like to sit, as it's not very comfortable for me anywhere else. Route 203 got 'swanky' buses - I suppose full-sized 12m buses were needed for extra capacity (Enviro200s are 10.8m at the longest, at least in London). I do wish more single-deck routes got full-sized buses, instead of this massive barage of Enviro200s... boring! Or get single decker hybrids(!) E200s can get up to 11.3m, afaik, but TfL being TfL mean the longest E200s are 10.8m. That's set to change apparently as the Enviro 200 MMC will be gaining a 12m version to replace the Enviro 300 - sad news for me as Enviro 300's are excellent buses and superior to Enviro 200's in every way. They are actually comfortable and have good legroom at the rear.
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Apr 28, 2015 7:49:25 GMT
I never noticed the padding on buses until it was mentioned on this forum a few years back and since then, I see there are some bad ones. The Scania Omnicities are bad. HTL's on the 388 have criminal legroom, by far the worst of any type of bus. Considering the 388 has Omnicities now as well, passengers will over time lose 3 inches in height, from spine reduction and leg reduction.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 28, 2015 9:10:33 GMT
Good day to you all. Having used bus services in several towns and cities outside and well outside London, I have discovered well padded seats. The padding on seats on London's buses seems almost non existent by comparison. I am guessing it is the hardness of the seats which leads to some passengers preferring to stand, even on a half-empty vehicle. The only reasonable seats I have found in London are those on the rather swanky single deckers used on Route 203. How did this route manage to avoid being lumbered with the awful Enviro 200's where the legroom offered by the second set of seats from the front on the nearside - seats set aside for those less able to stand - is barely enough for the average fit person to sit down comfortably. A few comments. 1. the basic answer to your question is that TfL specify the capacity they require on a route and also set out any route / clearance restrictions. You only get 12m long single decks if TfL specify that level of capacity. 2. operators can then choose the vehicle and seating they want to buy that meets the spec. In many cases the Enviro 200 is chosen because it's cheap and with thousands of them in service in London they're an understood type of bus (for drivers and maintenance staff). If the seat layout is a bit squashed to meet the required capacity then so be it. 3. TfL provide no financial incentive AFAIK in respect of seat comfort and pitch so we simply don't see the type of innovation you get on commercial routes like more comfy seats, "cafe" style interior finishes etc. I personally think this is a bit of an issue for London as there are areas where "nicer" vehicles might well pull some people out of their cars and on to the buses. 4. I'd also suggest, but can't prove, that London's much denser network and poor traffic conditions mitigate against long vehicles. Many single deck routes twist and turn their way round side roads and have to battle past dreadful parking meaning routes are slow. There's no point in having long buses trying to get round tight corners or narrow clearances between parked vehicles - there's too much risk of long buses getting stuck. 5. We also have the "no spying in my bedroom window" brigade which means that some routes that really should have double deckers are lumbered with single deckers which mean overly full buses.
|
|