FlushingExpress Posted March 31, 2009 Share #1 Posted March 31, 2009 What's being said? What's wrong with the R40M/R42 besides the rust on the exterior? I haven't heard anything about them from anyone good or bad. I think they'll be liked if their air conditioners work well a few months from now if they are still in service in Queens. With the R32s, the grumbling I heard was about the air conditioners, screechy brakes, and overall noise level. The 42s seem to have moderate noises with the brakes and operating overall. I agree with putting the oldest equipment on the V and not the E or F or even the R. The E's problem is that the MTA does not want to use the R46 and it is now "stuck" with the old 60 footers. The MTA actually did a good job in introducing the R160s to the E, it showed a regard for the ridership to update and upgrade its old equipment. i would not be surprised if R32 3838 is totally right. riders seem to really hate the R42s, which is why original plans were to have all R42s at Jamaica be moved to Pitkin so they only run on the . the reason that did not happen was because it was proven R42s were not safe on the , so now riders get their beloved R32s back while riders suffer with crappy cars that are on the brink of collapse and i would not surprised if they are begging for their old brightliners to come back. (NYCT) made a big mistake in retiring the Phase II R32s. if anyone actually likes the R40M/42s, i would like to hear why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlmerPark B6 Posted March 31, 2009 Share #2 Posted March 31, 2009 i would not be surprised if R32 3838 is totally right. riders seem to really hate the R42s, which is why original plans were to have all R42s at Jamaica be moved to Pitkin so they only run on the . the reason that did not happen was because it was proven R42s were not safe on the , so now riders get their beloved R32s back while riders suffer with crappy cars that are on the brink of collapse and i would not surprised if they are begging for their old brightliners to come back. (NYCT) made a big mistake in retiring the Phase II R32s. if anyone actually likes the R40M/42s, i would like to hear why. Yea, if the R42.R40M were able to run on the , wouldn't have to deal with it. And why do you exxagerate about the R40M/R42, some are holding up pretty well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted March 31, 2009 Share #3 Posted March 31, 2009 the reason that did not happen was because it was proven R42s were not safe on the How and why are they not safe? Is the roof ready to fall on the people's heads due to extensive corrosion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlushingExpress Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share #4 Posted March 31, 2009 How and why are they not safe? Is the roof ready to fall on the people's heads due to extensive corrosion? it is because of the repositioning of the train that had it stop all the way at the front of the platform. this left a 120 ft space at the rear and passangers complained about falling down and tripping while chasing down the train. yes, R40M/42 roofs are horrible. i rode on an R42 on Saturday during a rainstorm and buckets of water was leaking into the car. Yea, if the R42.R40M were able to run on the , wouldn't have to deal with it. And why do you exxagerate about the R40M/R42, some are holding up pretty well. that is exactly true and i am not exaggerating about the R40M/42. they are truly rusted pieces of metal that people seem uncomfortable with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted March 31, 2009 Share #5 Posted March 31, 2009 that is exactly true and i am not exaggerating about the R40M/42. they are truly rusted pieces of metal that people seem uncomfortable with. Well I am not sure if EVERYONE is uncomfortable with the R40M/R42. Although there is a great deal of corrosion in most of the cars, you cannot make generalisations like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSmith Posted March 31, 2009 Share #6 Posted March 31, 2009 (NYCT) made a big mistake in retiring the Phase II R32s. if anyone actually likes the R40M/42s, i would like to hear why. I don't dislike them. What I like is the line's letter in a color bullet on the outside and the destination signs on the sides. I like to be able to tell the train from a distance. The R42s seem fairly spacious, I just don't like where the poles are placed. The R42s have great air-conditioning. Their noise level is lower than the R32 overall. To the general ridership, the R32 and R42 are old trains. One has a color circle in the front, the other doesn't. Neither is beloved but the R32s are now connected with broken a/c units (whoever is at fault doesn't matter, passengers know they didn't work last summer) to E riders. So, the immediate thought seeing an R32 would be, no a/c. Honestly, I've heard from R32 fans that E and F passengers hate the R42. Not from anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted March 31, 2009 Share #7 Posted March 31, 2009 Honestly, I've heard from R32 fans that E and F passengers hate the R42. Not from anyone else. The validity of this statement has not yet been proven. I really want to know how many ordinary passengers hate the R42. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.