|
|
| Re: Cockfosters (361025) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Cockfosters |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Sat Dec 30 21:09:03 2006, in response to Re: Cockfosters, posted by David of Broadway on Sat Dec 30 18:01:53 2006. The seats in 1967 and 1972 Stock are seriously underpadded.It must just be that they're padded in different places, as I find the 1992 Stock's seats perfectly suited to the Waterloo & City Line (but the windows are wasted down there, I admit). Ultimately, all tube seats are pretty awful though. The only thing going for them is they don't try to squeeze three abreast (I hate unrefurbished 455s!). But there is an aspect of relief on a hot July day to emerge from the crush of the Drain into a refurbed 455 with the roof of Waterloo station shimmering in the sunshine. And the stretch of railway from Waterloo to Clapham Junction is scenic. :-) And I agree with you entirely about C Stock. I'm waiting to see if the S Stock's going to be any more comfortable than C Stock. I doubt it. I'm also waiting to see if it will be any faster than A Stock on those nice fast runs. I doubt that even more. Oh, and I should like the C Stock... it was the first stock I ever rode (Wimbleware, August 1987)! I still am not as keen on it as the other surface stocks. |
|
|
|