According to a study by European Transport Consult, costs are squarely in favour of wide-body stock as opposed to double-decked stock.

The specific initial investment per seat is low compared to both normal and double-decked stock as can be seen by the following examples.

German DB has compared several train concepts for the ICE 4. Table 1 gives the relevant initial invest figures (Reemtsema, Kurz 1997).

Table 1: Initial investment figures for different versions of ICE 4

	ICE 4	ICE 4 wide-body	ICE 4 2-decked
Investment	19.2 million EURO (100%)	22.0 million EURO (115%)	25.9 million EURO (135%)
Seats	419 (100%)	513 (122%)	506 (121%)
Specific investment per seat	45.900 EURO (100%)	42.900 EURO (93%)	51.100 EURO (111%)

Source: Reemtsema, Kurz 1997

A Swedish study (Andersson et al. 2001) on wide-body stock yielded the initial investment figures shown in the following table.

Table 2: Initial investment figures for wide-body trains

	Normal train	Wide-body train
Investment	100%	107%
Seats	100%	121%
Specific investment       per seat	100%	88%

Taking the average values from both studies, we get:

• Train fix costs typically increase by around 10% compared to normal trains.
• Specific fix costs per seat are reduced by around 10% compared to normal trains.

Maintenance costs: an increase of 4% for entire train and a decrease of 14% per seat according to a Swedish study.

Energy costs: per seat: 10-15% reduction

Highly dependant on required infrastructure changes.

Life-cycle costs (LCC) can be cut by up to 12 % per seat.

German DB AG estimates that the cost savings due to the operation of wide-body trains on the ICE network are so high that, even if the full costs of removing bottlenecks are charged to the programme, there will be cost savings in the mid term of 50 - 70 million Euro per year.