Ranking every Diesel Multiple Unit in Britain: Part 1

Britain is home to 22 classes of DMU that are currently in mainline passenger service. In this pair of videos I'll be reviewing all of them (except for the 196 as they entered service last week, I'll be making a video on them in due course anyway). In Part 1, I'll look at the 10 worst, which will be nice and miserable, you seem to like that.
Discord: / discord
Photography:
Public Transport UK
Arriva Traincare
Railphotographyuk, CC BY-SA 4.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
The Basingstoker, CC BY-SA 2.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
Alex Noble, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons
User:Metrophil, CC BY-SA 3.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
Superalbs, CC BY-SA 4.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
Hugh Llewelyn, CC BY-SA 2.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
Kat's Transport Photography, CC BY 2.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
OpenStreetMap contributors, CC BY 3.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
davwheat, CC BY-SA 2.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
Alex Nevin-Tylee (AL6NT), CC BY-SA 4.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
Class 153 cab, Chris McKenna, CC BY-SA 4.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
Transport for Wales
Peter Skuce, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
PeterSkuce, CC BY-SA 4.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/..., via Wikimedia Commons
Music:
The Monuments and Tunnels in Goa and Hampi - Bail Bonds

[@GWVillager]

The audio appears to have destroyed itself whilst uploading to KZbin... I'm very sorry, I'm not sure what the issue is! Oh well, at least it's still intelligible.

[@frogman7182]

Could you do one of these but with EMUs?

[@GWVillager]

Potentially, though it would be quite a way down the line.

[@frogman7182]

Ok

[@retro_wizard]

I always loved the look of the 150, 153, 155 and 156. They look super utilitarian

[@GWVillager]

They do have a practical romance to them.

[@simongurden9848]

Agreed

[@ThePlanetEnthusiast]

I love the 155

[@Lee_303]

156 was very good on rural, local lines. Not so good on longer distance routes or routes heavy with tourists, as being only 2 cars it was rare to see them more than double units. So, pretty hellish for say, Skegness but superb in rural Anglia. Of course Anglia were always good at doubling up units where other TOC's like to play the austerity card. A 156 hurtling along in the countryside, with the hopper windows open & the spacious, roomy interior was a godsend.

[@hereandthererailway]

nooooo the 165 and 166 are awesome.... but also i'm biased my Dad was the Engineer responsible for their design and introduction. One of the class even ran with his name on the headboard for a very short while

[@GDGRailway47712]

Where was your Dad based? Mine was 2nd in charge of the class 166 build at York and was at SPH before that. I don't know if they'd have known each other.

[@hereandthererailway]

@@GDGRailway47712 I imagine they do he was based at the tech centre in Derby but also had an office in York

[@ryleymclean313]

Cant believe the slander against the 156 Overall very well put together video!

[@LNER162]

Nice video I love all the sprinters, I love the boxy look of them 😁

[@alfyc6970]

I’ve been watching you for a couple months, it’s great to see you getting more views! I’m very happy for you

[@echo-eh8jz]

Another great video from my favourite train KZbinr!

[@StirlingWatt]

Could have explained the difference between class 150, class 153, class 155, and class 156, because as someone who hasn't ridden on them much to me they all look indistinguishable. Meant I was very confused when you act like there are massive differences between them in your ranking system, when from the outside they look borderline the same.

[@GWVillager]

Good point, I should have explained more. The Class 150s have 1/3 2/3 doors, whereas the 153s/153 have end vestibules with a very boxy, riveted appearance. The 156s have end vestibules but have a much smoother appearance, with a rounded lower body side. Hope that clears some things up!

[@LordEverythingtrains]

Class 153s are single car units split from 155s to get more trains. Hence the 153s have different cabs on each end.

[@thetrainspotter43]

Great video with a fair ranking I think!

[@joj.]

Hell hath no fury like a Class 150 with 3-2 seating arrangement run by Northern has those ruddy great bumps in the backrest that makes the seats impossible to sit on. Thank you Northern Rail.

[@GWVillager]

I daren't even touch the Northern 150.

[@hexicola]

I can't believe you put the 230 above the 150. I use both every day and the 230s are constantly breaking down. All 5 on my route were out of service this week. Great job TfW

[@branchline3573]

I personally quite like the 165s. Ive grown up with them my entire life pretty much. I have Chiltern as my local operator, and on the London - Aylesbury route (via amersham) they suit the route just fine. Chiltern’s stock has been air conditioned for a while too. Although I do understand your point about the number of carriages though, often I see more than 1 unit coupled together.

[@Lee_303]

Much more spacious interior & you could open the windows.

[@FannyLerouxTime]

I love the 150's, but for me it was the Pacers, I just adored them. I really miss them off our rails, never got bored of the bounce or that engine roar.

[@SteamboatWilley]

150s are basically a diesel version of a Class 318. They're designed for commuter trains in the north on lines that really should be electrified. They're still an improvement on Pacers. I sort of agree with you on 156s. They're very noisy and not as comfy as a 158 or 170. The one thing 156s have going for them is the huge amount of bike space. 170s are the best DMUs in the country.

[@Lee_303]

150 should really have been 4 cars like the 317 or 455 & only used on rural routes around the big cities. 2 car trains (& the 153 singles) have always baffled me, they were never adequate so why 2 cars? Even today on 158 routes when doubled up they're always rammed. The 156 was good in the RR days Birmingham to Cardiff, spacious inside with windows you could open, not to mention that Cummins turbo kicking in at speed 😃.

[@mathewperring]

Back many years ago now I regularly rode the Avocet line the 150s worked pretty well as they could cope with the number of passengers in the peak times, and their top speed was adequate for the line. The 2+3 was okay for this situation. As it was only 20 mins from one end to the other. Best bit was the facing bays by the driving cabs, where you could get a large group together and socialise. The 153s were an upgrade when you got one, except if they turned up in the peak and then it was a nightmare, during the less busy times the increased comfort was awesome.

[@jos4669]

150s are fantastic for one thing: rural, relatively short branch lines. i cleared off many of the cornish branches last year and i have to say they provided very fun and enjoyable journeys.

[@B737-hh4yk]

The class 156s are my favourite trains, i think they look beautiful!

[@Monty13Transport]

Cool!

[@PJWey]

So basically my local station, Upwey, is “blessed” with the 444 and “cursed” with the 150s? Sounds right to me! 😀 Although the 150 body does remind me of my beloved 317 memories!

[@Lee_303]

Yes a 150 is woefully inadequate nowadays for anything other than short branch lines.

[@greatbeccarailways]

Completely agree about 150s! Being from the north, I really dislike them. I've often chosen to wait around an hour to get a 195 instead of a 150. But also agree on TFW 150.. I spent 4 hours on once.. it was actually super comfortable!

[@IndigoJo]

The 150 clearly has the same body as a whole lot of other trains BREL churned out at the same time, like the 455/6, 317 and 319. Obviously, different engines and power sources. But the livery aside, you can go anywhere and see similar types of trains. I recall travelling on a 156 in Suffolk years ago and it was comfortable enough. It was my first time on a diesel (I'm from south London where they're all electric apart from one or two lines like the Uckfield line) and it was a bit like being on a bus, and a better one than the Leyland National which was what a single-decker bus meant back then. Since DMUs came in, crowded trains have become normalised on rural lines. I've heard people say that when they go on Cross Country trains out of Plymouth especially, it's packed before it reaches Bristol and they need to travel up north. They are typically only four coaches long and they need to be double that. In the days of Intercity they would have been sets of loco-hauled carriages. Same with the West of England line; always used to be eight carriages and a class 47 or further back a class 50, and when the DMUs came in, you couldn't get bikes on board anymore like you used to (well, one or two maybe).

[@jackmarshallD9525]

I was doing alright, sort of... then you got to the Voyager and well- Sound good? Look nice? Nice seating?! My good man, please, see a bloody Doctor.

[@LordEverythingtrains]

The class 150 is OK as long as its being filmed not ridden on

[@spottymaxy1628]

Gotta love the 185

[@colinriley123]

Due to cancellations i found myself aboard a 165 from Dawlish to Exeter SD. I think i was in a declassified first class section. It was really good. I wished i could have continued to Exmouth.

[@peterryan8472]

Great videos! As a former resident of Cornwall I hate Voyagers. They usually stank, as the toilets regularly malfunctioned. Then the the 150s were, as you say, simply abysmal. We were, however spoilt by having HSTs…. Suggest you go to Italy and review their MUs… fantastico!

[@alshick3973]

Bruh the class 139 looks like a half car mixed with a tram and train, looks kinda goofy to be fair, epic videos thank you👍

[@GWVillager]

It certainly does look a bit unusual.

[@bowlerstuff9589]

150/2s in Wales&Devon are used rather well in small capacity stopper roles.

[@Class158trainboy]

The class 158 is my favourite train of all time, also dont suppose you o ow where that photo of the northern class 158 was taken do you? It looks familiar.

[@GWVillager]

York.

[@Class158trainboy]

@GWVillager thought i recognised those seats, i used to live in a little town near york, which used to be one of my favourite places

[@smudgycat6750]

Mentioned the tilting potential for 220 tilt. The MK4 choachs wrre designed woth the same intent

[@bobulousgaming5353]

where part 2? its been 3 days also i dont like how you put the 150 last, i take it very regularly on the gwr truro to falmouth line and i think its quite good

[@GWVillager]

Part 2 will probably be out either tomorrow, Sunday or Monday. I did want to have it out on Tuesday, but things have got in the way, I'm very sorry.

[@bobulousgaming5353]

@@GWVillager np bro just im super fukin impatient

[@thecubingguy7333]

I agree with pretty much everything surprisingly

[@seemonthegac6283]

the class 153 is interesting, though ive only rode it 1-2 times

[@lefthandedspanner]

at one point class 150s were being used as the the peak time Nottingham-Sheffield-Barnsley express service (this was just before the 195s were rolled out) they were so unbearably crammed that I'm convinced Northern Rail were attempting to carry out nuclear fusion they just use internal space very poorly, having the doors in the middle means less room for seating; still, they're better than the ancient 142s and 144s they used to use

[@GWVillager]

Yeah, as I mentioned, the 150s don’t feel like they’re designed for any purpose at all. At least the pacers were extremely cheap!

[@daveb0789]

I raced a 150 out of Huddersfield once. Two of us were side by side through the tunnels before ge diverged for Sheffield. You can definitely hear more engine noise in the tunnel. I was headed towards Manchester. Guess who won the race lol

[@JustClickApprove92]

While I’m probably a bit biased, because I think they sound amazing, I feel the 150s and 156s are harshly treated here Engine noise and leg room aside, I have very little issue with them, and they hold their own on the routes they’re intended for. I’ve used 156s on the West Highland line, and they’ve been completely adequate

[@andrewphillips9391]

Yes, I've always liked 156s. Shame ScotRail had to fit theirs with ironing boards.

[@Pmjs]

I preferred working the Class 47 Push Pulls from EW to Glasgow QSt before they were replaced by 158s then 170s.

[@svetlanarocha]

Can you rank every British Electric multiple unit video too

[@GWVillager]

At some point, yes

[@fredstrainandbusvids.]

I like the 166 & 158

[@sprinterofficial8457]

the 150s running on the conwy valley is a great service, i much prefer them than a 153

[@stepheng7586]

I would put the class 156s in the top 3 DMUs ever built. I much prefer to ride a 156 over the awful 195s between say Lancaster and Barrow-in-Furness any time of the week.

[@Nick-ux7zt]

I've not got a problem with a 150 apart from the lack of leg room and acceleration. They make great trains for quiet suburban lines with lots of stations, or off-peak. I love class 156s and 158s which are arguably better than the class 195, but they're not as good at running stoppers. Sprinters are not nostalgic to me, because they're all much older than me, but I like them because they do the job that they need to do.

[@JScot92]

Scotrail puts its clinical 156s with ironing board seats, and commuter-style lighting on scenic lines of the west highlands, completely ruining the experience. They're also unrefined as hell and rattle like crazy. So yeah, it's nice to find someone who isn't really a 156 fan.

[@Nathanstrains]

Please do every Emu in great Britain

[@AndrewG1989]

Most diesel trains like the Class 150, Class 153, Class 155, Class 156, Class 158, Class 159, Class 165 and Class 166 are getting quite old despite they are very reliable. But the government wants to replace them all with new hydrogen/battery multiple units in the next 15-20 years. And older electric trains are also to be replaced by new electric multiple unit trains like the Class 313, Class 317, Class 318, Class 320, Class 323 and other older EMUs that are to be replaced and to scrapped. As the Class 314, Class 315, Class 321 (apart from Class 321 Renatus) and Class 322 AC EMUs and Class 455 and Class 456 DC EMUs that are already heading for scrap or are to be sent for scrap.

[@Pmjs]

I worked for BR&ScotRail so the best DMUs to work 170,158,156,101,117,150. The 156 was better to work on the Edinburgh Waverley to Glasgow Central via Shotts.

[@GWVillager]

What are 170s like to work on?

[@TanVasinTrains]

I think the class 156 looks pretty good.

[@callumradford3680]

7:09 good air conditioning on a 166? Why do you think those hopper windows are open… 😂

[@tomwatts703]

I always liked the 230s - better to recycle old stock than just scrap perfectly working trains - but the comment about their maintenance has aged like fine wine in light of the Vivarail debacle. Kind of ridiculous that the collapse of one company can completely remove rail services from an entire line, which still haven't been reinstated as of mid March 2023.

[@GWVillager]

The Marston Vale is just a shambles at this point, some of the 2 car 196s that are going spare wouldn't go amiss I'm sure.

[@Benji_transport_vids]

Personally, I love the 150's but that's probably because I see and ride them most of the time lol

[@hughjones4060]

What is the Class 139 nine doing on your list? Its not a multiple unit and its not Diesel powered, its LPG

[@GWVillager]

Most classification systems register it as a DMU, and it is internal combustion anyway.

[@Finley_Stuff]

The 166 and 165 are the same?

[@hobog]

I thought class 139 is powered by flywheel.. do they charge with an onboard diesel generator? That'd be disappointing

[@GWVillager]

Yep, it's powered by a flywheel, though it uses a small gas engine to get it spinning. Not technically a Diesel I know, but it's the closest category and is given a 1XX classification.

[@kieranstravels]

Seeing turbostars and the Parry People Mover of all things rank above 156s?? I certainly have to disagree, Well, as long as they aren’t the versions ScotRail have done with ironing boards anyway. Honestly, the purpose for 156s is definitely for local stopping regional services - This role comes especially into play on local stopping services around the North West, Liverpool, Cumbrian Coast Line, Harrogate Loop Line, And various other examples such as in the north east. They’re a huge upgrade over the class 150s, and you are correct on that. I personally think that 156s provide a very good level of comfort, with the “digital train” modifications adding wifi, USBs, and real time information screens similar to the 195s. 156s do serve a purpose, and would likley rank a lot higher if I was to do my own one of these lists. It’s nice to see someone praising the 155 and 153 though, they’re my favourite sprinters for the exact same reasons you mentioned! TFW have purchased some more 153s, including 3 old Northern ones, with the intent of making dedicated bicycle coaches for services on the heart of wales.

[@GWVillager]

My disdain for the 156s is that, as mentioned, I don't think there's really any situation where what they do wouldn't be better done by a 158, at least in my opinion.

[@kieranstravels]

@@GWVillager See, the problem is though, there simply isn't enough 158s for the task.

[@GWVillager]

@@kieranstravels Well yes, if you ask me they should have built more.

[@kieranstravels]

@@GWVillager I do agree with you though on that!

[@srfurley]

I liked the Pacers, but since they’re now sadly withdrawn they don’t feature here. I also like the Grand Central 180s. Have heard of reliability issues with them but have never experienced it myself. Then again I have only been on them maybe 8-10 times so maybe I was just lucky.

[@GWVillager]

Grand Central do seem to have coped reasonably well with them, though GWR could never get them working by the looks of it. I’m not sure what the difference has been.

[@lewiss626]

@@GWVillager Don't ask me know I know but the 180s at Grand Central.... not good. out of 10 you'll be lucky to have 6/7 working on anyone day at best.

[@timbounds7190]

The 180s are awful...apart from the reliability issues, they are very uncomfortable and noisy/ rattly. Simply inadequate for what is supposed to be a long distance InterCity train.

[@kristinajendesen7111]

WHAT! Those f...luffing 220 seats are awful, some of the worst seats I've sat on. They dug in to the back of my legs. Our pre-refurbished 159s were the best, SOOOOOOOOOO comfortable. The 158s at Salisbury that we got from the Midlands had these wonderful pink armchair, pullman like seating in the first before SWT changed them.

[@stevieinselby]

I'm baffled as to how you can say a 156 is worse than a 155 🤷🏻‍♂

[@GWVillager]

So am I, in a way. I just personally prefer the 155s.

[@BluRacer7]

I don't like the Class 180 for one reason and it still aches me to this day, their obnoxiously loud squeaky brakes that every time I'm on the platform I thought everyone around me would cover their ears at that point.

[@holnrew]

Travelling on a 150 in winter is awful, the heating isn't great and the doors let all the cold in at every station. On the voyagers, the legroom is awful and the toilets stink. When you have to stand by one for the entire journey because of the overcrowding, it's hell

[@archstanton5603]

Last time I travelled on a Voyager from Manchester it was with utter relief to be able to change at East Croydon onto a class 171 to complete my journey - and that was comparing 1st class! Ultimately none of these modern DMUs compared to the 'comfort & joy' of the Hastings six-car units on the Saturdays-only Brighton - Exeter service (even with the narrow seats)! 😀

[@LWR1]

My major bugbear with XC voyagers are the doors into the carriages- many times I have been in a busy 220 and the doors slowly trap me until I finally find the door open button 😂

[@martinconnerty1201]

The world's best DMUs in my opinion were the class 253s/254s, of which XC have a handful of 253s left so they count 😉.

[@damiancook625]

They are not able to work in multiple so cannot be counted.

[@martinconnerty1201]

Good point Damian. I hadn't thought of that.

[@radon1221]

Take for example the 158 - It would be perfect on the Heart of Wales line which is currently using only 153 and 150 sets (Gross!!) They are noisy, uncomfortable and the refurbished interior of the 150 is terrible imo!!! The seats are way to low and uncomfortable. It is a shame that they are so insistent to keep the 153 alive on the HoW line, it would be so much better to use the 158 as it is generally the best candidate for a regional service. That being said, I did get to experience travelling on a 175 (pre-refurbishment to new colour TFW scheme) on the HoW line a few years ago due to a train shortage. That was a brilliant experience and very comfortable, but totally not suitable for that particular route.

[@GWVillager]

In the ideal world, the HoW would get the 158s, however they are not cleared to operate the line except with deflated suspension bags, which of course can't be done with passengers onboard. Whilst I am sure a solution could be found, there are other routes that need the 158s more in my opinion, and the very minor route that is the HoW cab certainly cope with 153s until there is a better availability of DMUs.

[@radon1221]

@@GWVillager I will be honest I was unaware of the technical issues with the suspension system on HoW. Very interesting to know so thanks!

[@andrewphillips9391]

Have to say that I was disgusted that TfW abandoned the idea of using 170s on the line. I think a 2 car 175 could be a good fit, IMHO.

[@Tazerdon]

Say what you will about the 139, but I've never had a single late train on the route :p

[@Class43Goat]

holy crap I had no idea the 139 was even a thing what the hell is that? I'm convinced there's no engine in there and the drivers just got a set of pedals in the cab.

[@GWVillager]

Not far off to be honest. There is a spinning flywheel that generates power using energy from the brakes.

[@minusjos]

I've always personally enjoyed the styling of the class 150 (and by extention of the styling of most BREL units at the time) and I feel they're quite solid when it comes to rural branch line services (such as the conwy valley line, which i've ridden the full length of on a 150). maybe thats just my personal feelings, but i've not really had any bad experiences on them. they're just alright, if a bit outdated. Dislike trains like the 230 much more, they're very lazy "new" trains that make for an overall worse product than something newly built and the fact they even exist is rather indicative of the state of the country's railways and the DfT as a whole. (also god help me with 769s, those are AWFUL)

[@Lee_303]

I remember the posters & publicity for the Cambrian Coast in the late 80's, the 'little train' (class 150) trundling along, dwarfed by the sea & mountains, painted in that regional blue livery. If one turned up on the Cambrian now there'd be protests!

[@smudgycat6750]

150 to Cheltenham spa has left the chat

[@And_Zo]

I pray for a class150 when we take the kids out as the alternative has been the class 769 and they are simply awful, I like the look of the 769 but they are uncomfortable and slow, I look forward to the class 231.

[@clnre]

I can't understand why you like the seats on the 220's. I have had the misfortune of taking long cross country journeys on these trains and I suffer backache for days afterwards, no other train seat gives me backache. Also leg room is very cramped. I used to enjoy travelling to the midlands and north by train, but the discomfort of the 220's take all the enjoyment out of those journeys for me.

[@georgepom328]

Actually the 150s are essentially diesel versions of the 456s and they ran south london commuter stuff for years no bother

[@philipdouglas5911]

The 220s are the worst. Totally unsuitable for the routes that they operate and the crowding issue was pointed out before they were introduced. You cannot cram a 7 car train into 4 cars which is what has happened. Given the fact that many passengers have significant luggage then more thought should have been given to luggage space. It wasn't and that provided is totally inadequate. For an inter city train these have been a disaster and need to be replaced with something more substantial.

[@smithcast08]

How the 220/221 isnt last is mad, they are always awfully crammed and feel uncomfortable most of the time

[@GWVillager]

That's not the fault of the trains, but merely their allocation.

[@smithcast08]

@@GWVillager that is true, but they should only be used for the Crewe-Holyhead line in that case, less traffic around

[@britishboi1239]

I have been on a class 153 once and I can't say it was the best journey I had being the cosford airshow shuttle. ATW being the genius's they were allocated a pair of 153s to the shuttle service so despite it being the summer on a service everyone knew would be busy they allocated their lowest capacity units so the train was packed in fact I'd describe it as sardine packaging and of course the units have no ac all in all probably my worst journey ever but I'm judging too harshly because I've only been on it once. In other news my 2 favourites are in the top 10

[@GWVillager]

ATW were never that good if you ask me. TfW have at least applied a bit of sense to diagrams.

[@britishboi1239]

@@GWVillager true services have improved with tfw well except for Cardiff to Manchester as a 2 or 3 carriage 175 just isn't suitable for it but they don't have enough of them to pair them up and keep a busy timetable although I once saw a 150 running that service on someones video at crewe

[@GWVillager]

@@britishboi1239 150s are semi-regular occurrences on Cardiff-Manchester unfortunately. On the bright side, they're getting new trains and Mark 4s for the route, so that's good!

[@britishboi1239]

@@GWVillager it is always good to see more loco hauled sets especially on services that busy as they can be lengthened if need be

[@GWVillager]

@@britishboi1239 Agreed, locos are valuable assets.

[@Trainman10715]

3:07 a fairly ignorant remark really as the 150s are some of BRELs best in a factual sense, they were designed for commuter services which they are very well suited for. yes theyre a bit loud on the inside with no air con, this was standard for commuter trains for the time, and is fine now since the idea is youre not gonna be on it for more than 30 mins. length isnt a valid critisism as the whole point in a DMU is you couple 2 or 3 up when extra capacity is needed and if the operator doesnt do that then thats a problem with the operator and not the train. the 150s are also phenominaly reliable and cheap to operate, with their mechanical commonality with other sprinters making them easy to maintain and spare parts abundantly available. in a factual sense they are very good, threyre extremly reliable and get the job done at a cheap cost, exactly what you want from a commuter train that youll only be on for 30 minutes

[@GWVillager]

The thing is, bare facts aren't everything. Their internal layout is terrible, and not at all suited to anything, regardless of whether it's 2+2 or 2+3. Coupling units together isn't the *whole* point in a DMU either, and even that benefit is somewhat negated by the 150/1s lacking end gangways. Besides, any of the other DMUs mentioned share this quality of master/slave operation (Well not the 139 but you understand my point). The Sprinter concept with different classes of similar trains is indeed very useful, but the fact of the matter is I'm not comparing the 150s with the trains of their time, but rather the trains in operation now, and they most certainly do not hold up.

[@Trainman10715]

@@GWVillager facts are rellevant here, opinions can be counted yes, but they have to be based on something, if theyre based on cherry picked critisisms that apply to some things but not others then theyre invalid. their internal layout is almost identical to all commuter stock with vestibules at 1/3rd intervals and is totally identical to all mark 3 multiple units bar the wessexes. theres absolutly naught wrong with their internal layout, its perfectly suited to the stopper services they were designed for, if their internal layout isnt "suited to anything" as you claim then youre stating that theres an issue with vestibules at 1/3rd interval arrangments which is used on several classes as we know. coupling units is the point in dmus, theyre 2 coaches so as to satisfy the smaller routes with fewer passengers, and theyre then coupled to other units when extra capacity is needed. again this arrangment is used with many trains, take all the IETs for example, all the electrostars, theres so many trains that are too short on their own but can be coupled when needed. so again for your critisism to be valid it must apply to all units that are generally too small on their own, not least the class 155s, 156s, most of the 158s, most of the 195s and god help the 153s, but you failed to mention that for any of the trains you covered bar the 150, so again it comes across as simply cherry picking. the 150/1s lack gangways but if the operator was efficient they would use the 1s on the routes that only need 2 coaches and the 2s on services that require more, if they fail to do that its an issue with the operator and not the train. lacking end gangways also doesnt affect capacity and again, is common on many units, the IETs, the aventras, so many trains that are normally operated while coupled to another and yet lack end gangways, its not that big a deal. youre correct, all other DMUs can be worked in multiple, so why is it an issue that just the 150s are too short? what about the 155s, or any other 2 car DMUs you mentioned and yet failed to point out that theyre too short. its clear youre cherry picking for criticisms because you just personally dont like the units, which is fine but then just admit that rather than trying to fabricate issues with them that clearly arent massive issues as theyre shared by most other types of DMU. the sprinters have been a massive succes overall whether its a 150 or any of the others, if other classes of sprinters are useful then the 150s are too as theyre superficially the same, most passengers dont care where the doors are located and wouldnt be able to tell you if you asked them. the 150s actually do hold up when compared to trains of today, yes theyre a bit louder, but they operate (or should operate) commuter services where you wont be on them for more than 30 mins generally, and yes their lack of air con is a little uncomfortable but that only matters for the few hot days a year and even then theyre fine once theyre moving with the windows open. everything else the 150s have over modern stock, they have a superior ride quality to most modern tat, and theyre a hell of a lot more reliable than modern tat. infact the 150s (as well as all sprinters) have proven incredibly robust dispite their age, theyre cheaper to operate than modern stock, cheaper/easier/quicker to maintain than modern stock and more reliable than modern stock, the northern class 195s do an appalling amount of miles between breakdowns. while modern tat might look nicer than the 150s, thats just looks, on the whole theyll be a lot more expensive overall (which youll pay for through ticket price) and there will be even more of the issue that youve complained about where trains are being operated by single units, but now its because the other one has broken down and been sent back to the depot, but hey at least it looks shiny. at the end of the day, on the services that 150s should be operating, comfort comes second. what matters most is the stock being functional and getting the job done with little hassle and the 150 are as superb at doing that as they were when they were new i would also love to know how you somehow managed to call the GWR 166s better than their 165s when as far as i can tell, the only differences between them are the (now declassified) tiny bit of first class and the tiny tables in the 166s, as well as some 165s being 2 car. so in other words theyre basically identical, again it just seems as though your fabricating issues rather than actaully looking into them

[@paulsavage4647]

Did you just say 'the class 153' and 'comfort' in the same sentence. 😂

[@archstanton5603]

Harsh, but fair!

[@Olivers-trains]

150s are perfect on the Penistone Line, the new 195s are horrible on them and they are actually replacing 150/2s with 150/0s on the line

[@joshuaritchie3836]

Why not the 769's when that is also a DMU?

[@GWVillager]

The 769s are bi-mode as a class, even though TfW’s only run on diesel.

[@joshuaritchie3836]

@@GWVillager Are you going to do a separate video for the Bi-modes and Tri-mode trains?

[@GWVillager]

@@joshuaritchie3836 That's the plan, though it could be a long way down the line.

[@johndavidbaldwin3075]

The Voyagers are too small in all dimensions; too short , too low and too narrow. Travelling from Stafford to Birmingham they can be very overcrowded, even with 9 coaches, getting out of the window-seat you bangyour head on the luggage rack and your shoulders are against the stranger in the seat beside you.

[@GWVillager]

Overcrowding's a right pain, but more to do with XC/DfT neglect than the Voyagers themselves.

[@liamgunn4722]

Why are the voyagers only 4 and 5 coaches long Make the voyagers 10 and the super voyagers 12 like come on

[@butikimbo9595]

What british diesels have in common is that they are noisy.

[@TheCatOfWarCSGO]

Class 166 better than 180 is just an L, there's nothing really wrong with 180s for what they do, and their reliability is normal statistically (please don't take your actual opinions from overdone memes). 165s are pretty old and rancid. 156 isn't exactly luxury but they're a hell of a lot better put together than 155s

[@corpsimmons575]

Dude you do not sound how I thought in my head lol.

[@GWVillager]

What did you think lol

[@xxalexaviation]

Isnt the 139 electric

[@GWVillager]

Sort of, but it's self propelled and requires an internal combustion engine to get going.

[@lolroflpmsl]

Don't forget the 769...

[@GWVillager]

It's bi-mode (or at least some members of its class are).

[@lolroflpmsl]

@@GWVillager It used to be an EMU, but given they've bolted diesels on 319s it could "count as" a DMU - hateful things.

[@randomguy-tg7ok]

What makes the 165 so much worse than the 166?

[@GWVillager]

Loads of hopper windows, usually smaller formations (2 coach as opposed to 3) and lack of carpet on the interior. They also don’t have the reasonably comfortable 2+2 section of former first class (in GWR’s at least).

[@A-Trainspotter-From-Berkshire]

@@GWVillager The 165's were built without AC and the reason why the there is few 3 coach 165's in the West is because they are all need in the London & Thames Valley area.

[@randomguy-tg7ok]

Can confirm. I've been on a few of those lines, and if memory serves there hasn't been a 2-coacher in sight at least since they painted them green. According to a friend of mine there're apparently signs in the carriages of the 165s that say "if the AC breaks get the guard to open the window" or something of the sort, so I'm not quite sure what to make of that.

[@A-Trainspotter-From-Berkshire]

@@randomguy-tg7ok The locks on the windows are more or less broken.

[@GWVillager]

@@randomguy-tg7ok Yes, they require a carriage key to open. As @A Trainspotter From Berkshire says, though, they're often not responsive even to that.

[@speedstyle.]

class 139 isn't even a 'multiple' unit lol

[@physiocrat7143]

There is nothing wrong with the class 150 - for parcels.

[@GWVillager]

Even for that - a bi mode train would be better to take advantage of higher performance under wires. Something like the 769s if they can get them to work.

[@A-Trainspotter-From-Berkshire]

@@GWVillager The 769's have a worse performance under diesel than a sprinter and even under third rail or OLE power it is not much better than a sprinter.

[@GWVillager]

@@A-Trainspotter-From-Berkshire Indeed, they're not amazing, but as a suggestion of the concept.

[@maidenhead7760]

150 last place???? Absolutely wrong

[@isnitjustkit]

156 worse than the 155s? The 155s were so poorly built the middle of the carriage sags visibly

[@GWVillager]

I suppose that's part of my logic - if you're going to build a 156 you might as well build a 158, it's a huge step up for not that much more train.

[@isnitjustkit]

@@GWVillager But then you could say that about any of the Sprinters other than the 158s

[@A-Trainspotter-From-Berkshire]

@@GWVillager Well you could of just built a whole lot of 210's instead of all the Sprinter family of trains.

[@GWVillager]

​@@isnitjustkit Oh of course, none of the Sprinters other than the 158s should really exist if you ask me, I merely slightly prefer the 155's aesthetic.

[@user-hj6uf6nr9b]

From a driver's perspective, the 155s are by far the worse. The brake takes ages to come off, making smooth stops difficult, and there is a big lag in the power delivery. Plus stupid plug doors. I liken it to driving a boat. 156 on the other hand, solid workhorses.

[@EuroDC1990]

150: Completely agree, they're the most utterly horrid trains in the UK. The seats aren't comfortable, they feel very cramped, they have seats crammed in everywhere, the door pockets make some seats feel even more cramped and the fact the combination of door pockets andtwo windows but three bays of seats between doors on many units means you don't even get a good view. 156: I disagree wholeheartedly-ish I think when fully refurbished as they have been by ScotRail they're wonderful trains. The refreshed Northern United are okay too. The completely unrefurbished sets used by EMR however... Absolutely awful! 165: Decent for short journeys but awful for anything more than about half an hour. 139: Interesting, they do the job. A bit pointless but as a train geek I have you kinda like them. 155: Just too cramped, they look okay but the interiors are really uncomfortable. 230: A wonderful idea but a bit of a case of a solution seeking a problem. 153: Serve a purpose but it's a purpose that's less required these days. When operating in multiple though they can be good and provide good flexibility. 180: Some of the most comfortable seats on the network in my opinion but the lack of reliability and running under electric for much of the time makes them less than ideal for the routes they're on. Also too many table seats and not enough airline seats. 166: I think you've summed it up perfectly, they're good trains but not suited for long journeys. With a good refurbishment and new seats though they could be. 220: Fully agree about the seats, they're very comfortable. The problem is that they're half the length they need to be and a lot of the length that is there is taken up by toilets. The lack of a proper café on such long routes is also an issue. CrossCountry also don't seem to take the best care of them from what I've seen. They need replacing on the CrossCountry's long routes but would be much better than Turbostars on their shorter routes and some other inter-regional express routes.

[@GWVillager]

The Scotrail refurbished 156s are rather nice, I probably should have mentioned them yeah. I definitely agree about the 220s, they're really looking tired now and could do with some lighter work, replacing the 170s between Cardiff and Nottingham perhaps. I'd like to see what the Aventra Intercity could look like, perhaps they could help Cross-Country's capacity problems.

[@A-Trainspotter-From-Berkshire]

The 165's are perfectly fine for the North Downs Line which takes up to 2 hours to do on a stopper.

[@Blackburnian737]

@@GWVillager Plus you get to ride the scotrail 156's on the West Highland line! Though arguably the 158's would be better there.

[@billykaelin6358]

Obviously goat goes to 144

[@Formula4708]

139 isn't a multiple unit

[@Formula4708]

And 153

[@legoisthebest001SCR]

I don't think the 139 are DMUs?

[@pipeqez911]

what do you think they are then? no 3rd rail or overhead wire.

[@GWVillager]

I think you might be right there - they have an LPG engine to start the flywheel - but they're still combustion based.

[@legoisthebest001SCR]

yh

[@joshuaritchie3836]

@@GWVillager What about the 769?

[@lukeslocos6610]

11, vermin

[@andrewphillips9391]

I'd always put the 153 bottom. I absolutely hate them. Every time I've been on one, it's been overcrowded, 1 car being completely inadequate. The seating is cramped with awful legroom and the windows are too small and too high up for a good view. Glad to see most have been withdrawn. Shame TfW is keeping theirs.

[@dieselpower7075]

The sprinter family made british rail better. Fantastic at everything hence them still being here. You really know nothing about trains do you. This video was a waste of time.

[@kyle07871323519]

Some 220s do tilt the old Virgin stock are the tilting trains whilst the arriva trains don’t

[@GWVillager]

No, the 220s are non-tilting stock and the 221s were the tilting variant.

[@jordanlee6499]

THE CLASS 180 IS HIDEOUS

[@jordanlee6499]

The class 150s are NOT ugly the class 180s are fucling ugly and look vile on the outside NOT just on in the in in fact I loathe the class 180 so much I prefer class 313s to 180's.