Actually, I have been on Russian planes, but thanks for making assumptions. About the engines, probably because Russian engine technology has lagged behind the west since the 1950s, meaning Russian engines are very loud and inefficient. About the avionics, probably because the Russians have no experience in modern avionics, which creates a more user-friendly cockpit. I'm no expert, but I doubt that an older cockpit is any less safe than a new one.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the Tu-134 has had one mechanically-related crash, when the crew inadvertently shut down the operating engine after an engine failure. The Tu-154 has had three mechanical crashes, one to an engine fire, one from overstress caused by the malfunctioning autopilot, and one due to the use of a non-standard part. An-24s have crasehd twice since 1992 from engine failure. One Il-86 has crashed from an uncommanded elevator deflection. Some of those engine failures were no doubt caused by poor maintenance, which was endemic in the former Soviet Union in the 1990s, rather than from design faults.

To compare with western aircraft, the A320 has crashed because the computer didn't know the plane had landed. The Boeing 737 has had 7 mechanically related crashes since 1992, due to everything from malfunctioning instruments to engine failures to rudder deflections to stuck throttles. The 747 has the amazing exploding fuel tank. And don't even get me started on the DC-10/MD-11.

In short, Russian planes do not seem to crash more frequently than western planes due to design flaws. Comfort is a valid reason for preferring western-built aircraft. Safety is not.