FPH 603 Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) There's been a big debate about the Pacers, whether they're good or bad, they're Pacers. I've renamed the thread to stop the arguments, so I've made this as a simple discussion thread. EDIT: Renamed and converted to less biased thread. Edited January 17, 2018 by DoubleDeckInterurban 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Storey Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 I may not qualify. I do hate them, but I also recognise they were probably the main reason my branch (the Scarborough line, I lived at Pickering in the 1990's and used Malton every day) had an hourly service or better in the peaks, as there were not enough 158's to go around, and is now blossoming (now I have gone). Tricky. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moggs Eye Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Though I empathise strongly with the sentiments behind this, I am going to stand up and say, I think Pacers are amazing! They are proper, muddled British make-do-and-mend engineering that have kept some provincial train services running long past when the derided units should have been quietly retired. I haven't yet had a journey on one I didn't enjoy. However, I am not a regular commuter - my Pacer expeditions were always between Lincoln and Edale as a prelude to a good day's walking. I'm sure if I had been enduring them every working day, particularly on a service like Worksop to Sheffield where demand outstrips capacity by a long way, I'd be salivating with anticipation at the thought of their demise. I hope I will always have at least one Pacer on my layouts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Elaner Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Lincoln & Edale! They are not very close. I am guessing you had ti change at Sheffield? Was that on 1 pacer or a pacer & sprinter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesysmith Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Pacers have their down sides/bad points. Built down to a price. Living way beyond their planned lives. unsutable for jointed tracks so used on secondary lines. Drafts from everywhere and cold in winter (and spring/fall). Heaters that were so poor they might as well not have bothered. They also had/have their good points. Kept many lines open until the revival of rail with the franchising etc came around. They have good visablity with big windows and a nice open plan saloon layout. I always preferred them with the original bus seating The 3 bum seats were perfect for falling asleep on when the trains were empty. And from when I worked on them for BR I can say the number of warm bodies you can fit onto one was amazing. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted October 31, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 31, 2017 Can I be a founder member of the club please? Even my good lady calls them Nodding Donkeys... Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FPH 603 Posted October 31, 2017 Author Share Posted October 31, 2017 I made this (joke thread) for the people of the Imaginary Locomotives thread, for those that truly have a dislike for Pacers. It's interesting to see someone with a different opinion, and you could be the one who keeps order in the thread (an give a different perspective). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FPH 603 Posted October 31, 2017 Author Share Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) Can I be a founder member of the club please? Even my good lady calls them Nodding Donkeys... Phil Sure! I like the enthusiasm! I may not qualify. I do hate them, but I also recognise they were probably the main reason my branch (the Scarborough line, I lived at Pickering in the 1990's and used Malton every day) had an hourly service or better in the peaks, as there were not enough 158's to go around, and is now blossoming (now I have gone). Tricky. Anyone who will make fun of Pacers can qualify! Edited October 31, 2017 by DoubleDeckInterurban 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted October 31, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 31, 2017 They appeal to my "don't like everything shiny, everything dull and 'perfect'" views, but they don't appeal to my "I want a pleasant journey" views, although there can be something rather sociable about them. I won't be sad to see the back of them but I won't avoid a trip on one on a preserved railway at some point in the future either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butler Henderson Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Anyone fancy a The We Hate 150/2s Club with their 3 aside seating. Give me a Pacer any day instead of one of those. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FPH 603 Posted October 31, 2017 Author Share Posted October 31, 2017 Introducing: Our first headquarters! 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG John Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 I've never been on one, but it's a shame that there isn't a modern day Colonel Stephens, keeping barely viable lines open with a collection of antiquated stock and assorted oddities. They would seem ideal successors to the various railcars tried in the 1920s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyman7 Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 My son, (8) loves them - but as we live in the London suburbs I suspect that's due to the novelty - he might change his mind if he had to commute on them....anyone remember the Mk1 coach that was also rebodied with Leyland National bus body panels in the 1980s? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffin Road Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 We said this about 101s etc 30 odd years ago ! Living in Scotland and being deprived of pacers I would go out of my way to travel on one ......and I love a 153 ! Mike b Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfsboy Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 When you are cold tired and/or wet even a Pacer looks very welcome .I should add I have never actually even seen one . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 I have only ridden on a couple of Pacers (classes 142 and 144); the seats were just bus seats and not very comfortable (I know some have been refurbished and have improved seating, but that was well after my experiences).However, I can't say the ride was bad. It wasn't ideal on jointed track, with the 'Nodding Donkey' name being appropriate, but compared to the riding of many Australian trains (those NSW double deck interurbans excepted!), the ride was fairly soft and forgiving. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesysmith Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 As one who worked with them, let me save time and list all the bad points- Brakes. Originally built with single brake cylinder and cables to the brake shoes, these would stretch in service, giving unreliable brakes, and sometimes dangerous. These were replaced with direct acting brake cylinders. Doors. They originally had bus double folding doors that could be blown open with a breeze. They were replaced, but the new doors (that they still have) had their own fault. These are locked into place with a little relay/locking pin that could and did stick. A carriage key would loosen these and get the doors to interlock. Windows. They were only built with single pain windows, making them vulnerable to broken windows. Even flying ballast (never mind vandalism) was a hazard. They had to fit plastic film over the windows for safety (all other trains on the network are fitted with double glazed windows, and HSTs etc have a speed limit with the outer pane broken). Engines. They originally had updated Leyland bus engines (a direct descendent of the one fitted to the first gen DMUs). Very unreliable. All replaced with cummins 12L ones. Gearboxes. They originally had bus gearboxes fitted, useless. Replaced with voith. Chassis. Poor over jointed tracks. But this was a brilliant piece of RTC design. Trust me, on CWR these are very stable. Even at speeds off the clock. Interior. Built down to a basic price. But the later replacements never seem to capture the simplicity of the originals. They always seemed to me like trying to polish a tu*d. The bus seats at least allowed a good open view with the low backed seats. These along with the big windows did give a good view of whatever bit of northern industrial decay you were passing through. Heating. Why bother. The heating came from roof mounted heaters using engine coolant. Never mind leaks caused problems with the engines, and leaked into the saloons. Having the hot air from these at roof level and hot air rises, good idea. And the aux webasto heaters, they never worked. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Oh goody, another thread moaning about a type of train that has lived much longer than they were supposed to because of political decisions, and used on services they are unsuitable for because of another political decision, and have remained unmodernised because of another political decision, yeah its all the bloody trains fault isnt it! A question if I may- Given the choice would you catch a Pacer or walk? Because if it wasnt for the Pacers that would be the only other option, there is no way we could be carrying the passengers we are without them! In case you hadnt guessed, I wont be joining your club because I think the Pacers have done an amazing job keeping lines open and services running even though we desperately need (and have needed for several years) a large new build of go anywhere DMUs to finally replace what has been a life saver for our over politicised railway, but I suppose thats the Pacers fault as well. Signed somebody who used to enjoy driving the GWR 143s before switching to trains which are even older. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 My son, (8) loves them - but as we live in the London suburbs I suspect that's due to the novelty - he might change his mind if he had to commute on them....anyone remember the Mk1 coach that was also rebodied with Leyland National bus body panels in the 1980s? I did propose GWR move their 143s (minus toilet) onto the Windsor, Henley,Marlow and Greenford branches to allow the 165s to be cascaded to Bristol but unfortunately I was outvoted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesysmith Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Lets compare the different types. 140. RTC prototype. Some of the best bits were dropped due to costs. These include the better door designs and beter riding chassis with a longer wheelbase than the production versions. 141, These were the first design. A very basic cheap design. The only one of these that was any good was 141113. This was because this was the prototype for the later refurb of the rest. 142. These were probably the worst riding of the lot. Paired with a body that had drafts from new, and now suffer from rust/corrosion. 143/4. These are the best riding ones, with better bodies and at least they got rid of the heater pods on the roof. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Alex TM Posted October 31, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 31, 2017 HI everyone, Don't hate them as such, but Middlesbrough to Newcastle a couple of years ago by the long route brought me close to it! Regards, Alex. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FPH 603 Posted October 31, 2017 Author Share Posted October 31, 2017 Lets compare the different types. 140. RTC prototype. Some of the best bits were dropped due to costs. These include the better door designs and beter riding chassis with a longer wheelbase than the production versions. 141, These were the first design. A very basic cheap design. The only one of these that was any good was 141113. This was because this was the prototype for the later refurb of the rest. 142. These were probably the worst riding of the lot. Paired with a body that had drafts from new, and now suffer from rust/corrosion. 143/4. These are the best riding ones, with better bodies and at least they got rid of the heater pods on the roof. I should rename the club to 'We Hate Class 142 Pacers Club' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titan Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61l4F3Q-uBg Didn't like them much either... Edited October 31, 2017 by Titan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesysmith Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Let me make it clear, I am not a member of the pacer haters club. I like them, not love. As for the trains BR was forced to buy in the 80`s, the best was the 156, by a mile. I rate the pacers about equal with the 150`s. They were a train that got the job done, but not without their faults (ps-why can BREL not design a train with drafts, even when new?). As to the best pacer, as before 141113. ROCKET. The best pacer design, without question, the 153/5. That is what the pacer should have been to start with. Using the bus bits with traitional DMU underpinnings, not the 150s with the BREL sardine spec suburban bodies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Nuff said !! Brit15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now