Originally Posted by
EWR764
I sat in the aisle seat with size 12 dress shoes, and found the footwell to be adequate. With shoes off, I am rather confident my 6'2"/220 frame will be able to sleep comfortably. The footwell is better than IPTE and way better than non-bulkhead sCO Diamond.
That is good news, the footwell was the downfall of the sCO Diamond, particularly on the 763.
Originally Posted by
cerealmarketer
What overnight testing has DL and AA done with its new products in the last year?
I don't really understand what point you are trying to make. Both DL and AA bought off the rack seats, they have been extensively tested, and installed on OALs. Its very different than a new proprietary design, which requires far more careful pre-purchase testing, and where they look like they are trying to get feedback on only now, as its rolling out.
Originally Posted by
cerealmarketer
Lovely footwell there in the Vantage XL....the 'width' in that product is a marketing gimmick to gloss over that when your feet get into bed mode you're in a coffin thanks to the tight pitch and no angle away (Vantage XL is about a little extra width for wider airframes, not about better pitch).
It's still a Vantage - which is regularly deried by Delta fliers as sleeping in your own coffin.
767-400 Delta One Review - Like Sleeping in Your Own Coffin
Wow, just wow. You post a picture of the much smaller vantage (which is NOT the Vantage XL+, or even the Vantage XL) and in its smallest version (on the 763). I think you know that this has little to nothing to do with the Vantage XL+, and those shoes are awful...
I have ridden in the Vantage lots (and if you have flown SFO/LAX-JFK or DL from JFK-Europe, you have too, it has its issues, but its a far different seat than Delta is putting on the 777/350.
But to make it clearer, here is a nice schematic by Thompson, which shows what the footwell looks like flat (note this is their F+J set up, but the footwell is the same on the J only set up), its far, far, far different than what you tried to claim:
The Vantage XL is currently being used by SAS (in a slightly narrower 330/340 config) and the reviews have been uniformally good on the seat, there is nothing wrong with it, let alone the footwell size. The only "advantage" polaris has is that as EWR764 pointed out, the percentage of your body in the tunnel is slightly greater on the Vantage XL+ by a little bit than on Polaris, but neither are open like some seats.
Originally Posted by
EWR764
I tried a Polaris bulkhead center seat, the footwell was spacious but it was acknowledged that the non-bulkhead center/window seat footwells are slightly smaller. Didn't get to try one out because the seat unit doesn't have a corresponding chair for the non-bulkhead center seat. I was able to look at the non-bulkhead center footwell, though, and it did not seem to be much different than the bulkhead center seats upon visual inspection. I am only relaying what the contract rep told me with respect to the dimensions of those seats. Importantly, the non-bulkhead center/window footwell is square, not triangular like the current seats.
However, I tried the aisle seats (angled) and was pleasantly surprised by the foot space. My expectations turned out to be worse than reality. That's what I was referencing in the quoted post.
If you tried
the isle non-bulkhead and it was fine for you at size 12, 6'2" and 220 then It will work. It looks really narrow given how it tapers, but if it is not an issue, then great.
