I don't think there is any grammatical or syntactical error in 1, so it is understandable and makes sense, but yes, the preference would be for number 2. Number two links two independent clauses which have the same verb tense, so it feels natural.
In Number 1, the independent clauses use different verb tenses, so it feels as if there is some emphasis on the hurrying, or that there is some expectation being built up for an action resulting from the hurrying.
I would say that sentence no. (2) makes more sense.
I hurried to the station and took the train. Sounds good.
I was hurrying to the station and took the train.
This kinda sounds off putting because you seem to be hurrying to the station and all of a sudden you take the train(seemingly never having reached the station). Hence I believe that (2) makes more sense.