|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 28, 2015 12:14:46 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. You haven't been on an Enviro 200 then lol. Whilst I've not used the HTL's before (they are on my hitlist), I've rode plenty of Lolynes both in London and provincial examples outside of London and I've never had issues with legroom on them. |
|
|
|
Post by allentc on Apr 28, 2015 12:39:33 GMT
Worst legroom has to be the East Lancs Scanias on the 127. Try sitting on the high mounted forward facing seats just after the exit doors (second row) I can't get my feet in the gap between the plinth moulding and the seat in front...and I have average sized feet!
I find London bus seats to be pretty good. Transit buses in Canada and USA that I have traveled on typically have a plastic moulded seat with a slither of vinyl down the middle with no padding underneath.
Ciclo seats I find very comfortable despite their minimal padding. Urban 90s I find slippery so I have to keep pushing myself back into the seat. Esteban Civics are nice when new, but when worn you can feel the internal seat back moulding digging into your back.
Also bus manufacturers should ditch seats facing each other. Unless you are traveling as a part of four nobody likes these as it means you have to either sit staring at the person sat front of you or focus on the floor/out of the window/ceiling/phone instead. Especially the ones facing in the wrong direction of travel - always the last seats still available on a bus.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 28, 2015 14:25:46 GMT
Worst legroom has to be the East Lancs Scanias on the 127. Try sitting on the high mounted forward facing seats just after the exit doors (second row) I can't get my feet in the gap between the plinth moulding and the seat in front...and I have average sized feet! I find London bus seats to be pretty good. Transit buses in Canada and USA that I have traveled on typically have a plastic moulded seat with a slither of vinyl down the middle with no padding underneath. Ciclo seats I find very comfortable despite their minimal padding. Urban 90s I find slippery so I have to keep pushing myself back into the seat. Esteban Civics are nice when new, but when worn you can feel the internal seat back moulding digging into your back. Also bus manufacturers should ditch seats facing each other. Unless you are traveling as a part of four nobody likes these as it means you have to either sit staring at the person sat front of you or focus on the floor/out of the window/ceiling/phone instead. Especially the ones facing in the wrong direction of travel - always the last seats still available on a bus. The other horrible seats on Omnidekkas are the rear seats - because at the time they built the Omnidekka, the only way to meet TfL's total capacity quota was to squash seats in with horrific legroom. Other than that and the low saloon height clearance, I quite like the Omnidekkas, particularly the Metrobus 900 series. Circlo seats are fine despite the many people somewhat finding fault with them. I've not got the best back in the world but yet, they don't give me any grief. Urban 90's are really bad and it lets down Arriva's 55 reg VLA's massively especially as all the other VLA's had Esteban seats. I don't mind facing seats so much but they were/are annoying for me when I'm filming a bus journey and someone is sitting in those seats - the Euro II DLA's & all DLP's being the most difficult. |
|
|
|
Post by Connor on Apr 28, 2015 14:39:00 GMT
Urban 90's are really bad and it lets down Arriva's 55 reg VLA's massively especially as all the other VLA's had Esteban seats. Massive LOLs at this. The Urban 90s are a huge improvement on the horrid Civic (that Arrival is so keen on   ), especially since the refurbishment where the padding was improved/added. They feel like slightly smaller then usual seats (for me) but that's my only gripe with them. |
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 28, 2015 15:17:30 GMT
Worst legroom has to be the East Lancs Scanias on the 127. Try sitting on the high mounted forward facing seats just after the exit doors (second row) I can't get my feet in the gap between the plinth moulding and the seat in front...and I have average sized feet! I find London bus seats to be pretty good. Transit buses in Canada and USA that I have traveled on typically have a plastic moulded seat with a slither of vinyl down the middle with no padding underneath. Ciclo seats I find very comfortable despite their minimal padding. Urban 90s I find slippery so I have to keep pushing myself back into the seat. Esteban Civics are nice when new, but when worn you can feel the internal seat back moulding digging into your back. Also bus manufacturers should ditch seats facing each other. Unless you are traveling as a part of four nobody likes these as it means you have to either sit staring at the person sat front of you or focus on the floor/out of the window/ceiling/phone instead. Especially the ones facing in the wrong direction of travel - always the last seats still available on a bus. The front left seats on the Olympus is pretty cramped as well, coupled with the massive front window makes you feel like your floating in mid air...which is quite fun  Gemini 2 front right seats are quite cramped too, but although quite low the models with bucket-style seats are comfortable to sit on. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 28, 2015 15:20:55 GMT
Urban 90's are really bad and it lets down Arriva's 55 reg VLA's massively especially as all the other VLA's had Esteban seats. Massive LOLs at this. The Urban 90s are a huge improvement on the horrid Civic (that Arrival is so keen on ), especially since the refurbishment where the padding was improved/added. They feel like slightly smaller then usual seats (for me) but that's my only gripe with them. I can only say you've a backside made out of steel then  |
|
|
|
Post by rambo on Apr 28, 2015 17:07:06 GMT
Try driving them!
Drivers seats are worse than passenger seats.
|
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 28, 2015 17:23:45 GMT
The Omnitowns on the 181 try sitting at the 4 rear seats, no padding and little space, get someone who is oversized attempt to sit next to you your squashed. Have to be Marga People only in those seats to avoid getting squashed!
Eseban Ciclcos are horrid. The most comfortable seating IMO is Lazerinni and Esteban Civics.
Putneys Gemini 2s have the most Horrid seating in any Gemini 2 I've come across, feels like your sitting on a nail!
To Be Honest though the most comfortable bus seats I have ever come across are Old School Bench Seats, the padding was just excellent. When I did the 415 under Arriva earlier this year I got a DLA with Bench Seats, very comfortable ride, 17001 last year on the 158 very comfortable seating.
|
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 28, 2015 17:29:14 GMT
Urban 90's are really bad and it lets down Arriva's 55 reg VLA's massively especially as all the other VLA's had Esteban seats. Massive LOLs at this. The Urban 90s are a huge improvement on the horrid Civic (that Arrival is so keen on ), especially since the refurbishment where the padding was improved/added. They feel like slightly smaller then usual seats (for me) but that's my only gripe with them. I agree, I used to dislike them a lot as they were a bit uncomfortable, buses that have gained refurbs that have Urban 90s seem to have gained more seat padding on them. I did the 464 in a MPD a few weeks ago and was a MPD, the seating was fine. Certain Omnicitys have horrid seating. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2015 17:43:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on Apr 28, 2015 17:49:21 GMT
The DOE's are the most uncomfortable for me. The seats are worn out, especially at the rear of the bus. The most comfortable buses are anything with Esteban Civic seats, such as all of Arriva's 03 reg DAF's such as the remaining DLA's, the DWS/DWL's and DW1-133, and most newer Enviro's and Optares
|
|
|
|
Post by l1group on Apr 28, 2015 21:47:22 GMT
I remember when the 148 had SELs just before the Omnicities, they had leather seats which were really comfortable!
A few comments.
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.
The Enviro 200 (10.8m) weirdly have the random space which has no seats - seems to be a fairly good standing area that I like. If not, good for luggage (A10, anyone?)
London Buses have no competition, so they don't have to impress others enough. There are very few possible local journeys inside London with non-London operators that are possible (£2 Victoria-Hammersmith by First Berkshire 700/1/2! - my word they are comfortable seats!) Also, London isn't exactly High Wycombe etc, with Carousel Buses swinging long Tempos around housing estates (because they can). London's bus network is a stalemate now.
And thanks to some of the annoying NIMBYs, we have no 3rd LHR Runway, overdue rail projects (partly) (Crossrail is many years late since planning terms), the 316 (and some other routes) is single deck, etc etc...
And living under the flight path of LHR, I stick my hand up in support of the third runway (overdue by about 60+ years at least, as it was originally planned in the 1950s (quote from Wikipedia: "December 1953: Plans to expand north of the Bath Road were abandoned, to great local rejoicing.[30]"). Yeah...). |
|
), especially since the refurbishment where the padding was improved/added. They feel like slightly smaller then usual seats (for me) but that's my only gripe with them.
Gemini 2 front right seats are quite cramped too, but although quite low the models with bucket-style seats are comfortable to sit on.
which means that some routes that really should have double deckers are lumbered with single deckers which mean overly full buses.