Originally Posted by
doubleA
I'm an ex-NW flyer. I prefer the 763-ER BE barcaloungers over the stiff board that is the A330. The 757 International's aren't bad given they fly such short haul flights-- JFK-DUB or JFK-AMS is no big deal in those... I hate that the foot rest of the recliner is not contiguous like the 767s though.
I can see liking the 763 seat over the 330 seat, but do you think they are that far apart? My issue isn't the idea that one prefers one over the other, but the claims about the A330 being obviously better.
As for the 757 seat, I don't have a particular problem with the ex-DL seat, but it has less leg room and less recline than the 767 seat, so loses for me there. The ex-NW seat, though, is just sad - pneumatic operation, no power port, "portable" IFE, and dilapidated condition (I've never flown on the plane when less than 2 BE seats were broken in some way - so much so that FAs seem to have become pretty adept at violently kicking broken leg rests to get them to extend).
Originally Posted by
tacostuff
Actually, come to think of it, I did fly a DL767 from CAI to JFK on the week of the Iceland Volcano debacle a few years ago (my original *A flight on LH through MUC was definitely a no-go). I forgot how narrow they were.
If you forgot how narrow they were, perhaps it didn't make that much of an impression? To me, this is what it comes down to. Nobody is going to deny that the A330 seats are up to 1.75" wider at the seat bottom than the 767 seat. The question is whether that has a noticeable effect on comfort for most people.