Originally Posted by MarkXS

Except for the new IFE, I actually prefer the old seats for daytime flights like Europe-USA. Wider seat, you're not bumping elbows with your seat opponent like in new-C, underseat storage (of course often "under-footrest" storage to keep the darn thing up.) In a sitting position, the old seats are more comfortable IMHO, even in the narrower 767 version.

UA made the new-C seats narrow enough to fit 6 per row in their narrowest widebody, the 767. They didn't make a wider variant for the 747 or the 777. Whereas the old C seats in the 747 & 777 were two inches wider.

Having no elbow room in C is not really acceptable, no matter how good the IFE and the lie-flat sleeping position.

History will repeat itself. The UA new-C is going to be outclassed early in its lifecycle. And not just by Asian and European carriers. AC's C suite is far superior - it's more like UA's new-F. I haven't been on DL's new seat but I believe that's going to be better too.

UA's new-C outclasses the 1990s lie-flat-at-angle seats like NW/KL WBC, AF, LX, etc. in terms of sleeping comfort. But they didn't aim at the right target.

Just like American car companies. They tried to match or exceed the best the competition had 10 years earlier, and managed to do so. Chevy Cobalt 2006 would have been a great 1996 compact. UA's new C is a great 2000 C-seat, maybe even a great 2005 C-seat. But other airlines have much better already or coming online in the next few years. Given the glacial pace of UA's conversions (are any 777s done yet?) and their financial condition, this new-C will be "old" very soon. UA didn't account for what better airlines were planning.