What Would You like to see Son of Beast make way for?

What I have always wanted to see, and I've been shot down with the idea on other forums since it appears they are passe now, but a full-circuit B&M invert is sorely lacking in the park. With Invertigo being insanely popular an invert makes sense to me.

If they should go with a new woodie I would like to see a GCI twister. With Racer being an out-an-back and Beast being a large free-form woodie, a wooden twister would complete the lineup.

G-Dog

Geauga_Dog said:

What I have always wanted to see, and I've been shot down with the idea on other forums since it appears they are passe now, but a full-circuit B&M invert is sorely lacking in the park. With Invertigo being insanely popular an invert makes sense to me.

If they should go with a new woodie I would like to see a GCI twister. With Racer being an out-an-back and Beast being a large free-form woodie, a wooden twister would complete the lineup.

G-Dog

Exactly my thoughts, G-Dog. Both would be a great fit at the park.

I'll throw this out there. Someone on Facebook mentioned that they've always wanted a park to build large twisted triple racer from GCI. I'm sure they'd jump at the chance to top their Lightning Racer design.

Kings Island certainly has the space for such a large design (and the have the leftover wood for it...). Not likely here though.

What would I like to see on SOB's site?

Hmmmm...

An operating Son Of Beast.

Mike

I know a lot of people would want a wing-rider. they could make a new section of the park there, with a new roller coaster, or possibly two. A stand-up and a floorless.

Being that KI is a 3.5 million guest a year park, I would highly doubt they would add a slighly smaller than SOB woodie. Marketability is extremely important for a park with those types of attendance figures, and with the reputation SOB developed it's hard to envision them building anything wooden. It would not be surprising to see Cedar Fair take the same approach as they did with CW and go with the giga, but certainly there's a lot of options.

beastmaster said:

What would I like to see on SOB's site?

Hmmmm...

An operating Son Of Beast.

Mike

I feel ya Mike.

Geauga_Dog said:

What I have always wanted to see, and I've been shot down with the idea on other forums since it appears they are passe now, but a full-circuit B&M invert is sorely lacking in the park. With Invertigo being insanely popular an invert makes sense to me.

G-Dog

I totally agree with your reasoning of installing a B&M invert. That would be my personal preference and KI could use another high capacity ride. The only downside that I could see to that would be that the suspended and inverted boomerang would all be in the same section of the park.

I really enjoy GCI and GG coasters. But is another wood coaster in that spot really going to help them move away from the stigma that was SoB?

I'd like to have a B&M floorless or multi-looper, but that's probably not gonna happen as long as Vortex is still standing.

Been on both U.S. B&M wing riders and enjoyed both, but there will likely be 3 of them within a 5 hour drive of here by next season. So having one in my home park is not really desirable to me. Yes, there are 3 B&M inverts within that same distance also, but all of those are at least 17 years old. Plus CF isn't likely to build one that would take away from their rumored record breaker at their flagship park.

You can look at my top 10 and see that I like Intiman coasters a lot. However, I also know that they aren't really known for their reliability. Once again, do you really want to replace SoB with something that suffers from frequent down time? Plus B&M track is made about 1/2 hour from the park, so I would think that would help save a couple of million dollars in transportation fees.

A B&M giga would be great, I think, not sure though as I haven't made it to Wonderland this season. Yes, they already have a hyper, but to me that's like saying we have a Long John Silvers in town why would we need a Bonefish Grill. BTW we have neither of those restaurant in Mason, so if any one is looking to open a seafood restaurant I would suggest looking into purchasing land in Mason. 24th best town to live in America and no seafood places WTF....lol

I have no desire for a Wild Mouse, Zac spin or anything else that can't move over 1,000 people through in a hour. Of course, that would be a good way to increase Fast Lane sales.

d-lo775 said:
I'd like to have a B&M floorless or multi-looper, but that's probably not gonna happen as long as Vortex is still standing.

Kings Dominion has Anaconda and Dominator so it is possible to have both in one park. Another large sit-down multi-looper would not be a bad addition since Vortex is 25 years old (and it sure felt like it on my two rides last Saturday).

A B&M giga would be great...

If they were to go the giga route I'd want to see something along the lines of I-305 and not another Beemer. But then again it would be a ride that can't be better than what's at the flagship.

G-Dog

Geauga_Dog said:

If they were to go the giga route I'd want to see something along the lines of I-305 and not another Beemer. But then again it would be a ride that can't be better than what's at the flagship.

G-Dog

I love I-305, so I can't say I disagree with you. But I think Cedar Fair (among others) are done with Intamin until they prove that they've gotten their act together, mechanically speaking.

d-lo775 said:

I totally agree with your reasoning of installing a B&M invert. That would be my personal preference and KI could use another high capacity ride. The only downside that I could see to that would be that the suspended and inverted boomerang would all be in the same section of the park.

There goes that "enthusiast talk" again. GP would not see any similarity between an invert and Top Gun or Face Off. "One goes upside down and one doesn't" "That one goes backwards, those two don't". Dorney had no problem sticking Possessed and Stinger right next to each other and they are both inverted shuttle coasters.

I like the inverted route, but I really don't see any reason KI would avoid another wooden coaster if they thought they could market it somehow. GP is not as stupid as we think they are, so if they build a smaller wooden coaster, it won't take them long to figure out that is not SOB.

Paul

alpengeistno3 said:

d-lo775 said:

I totally agree with your reasoning of installing a B&M invert. That would be my personal preference and KI could use another high capacity ride. The only downside that I could see to that would be that the suspended and inverted boomerang would all be in the same section of the park.

There goes that "enthusiast talk" again. GP would not see any similarity between an invert and Top Gun or Face Off. "One goes upside down and one doesn't" "That one goes backwards, those two don't". Dorney had no problem sticking Possessed and Stinger right next to each other and they are both inverted shuttle coasters.

I like the inverted route, but I really don't see any reason KI would avoid another wooden coaster if they thought they could market it somehow. GP is not as stupid as we think they are, so if they build a smaller wooden coaster, it won't take them long to figure out that is not SOB.

Paul

Your right. The guests (Dorney) are probably like, "That one launches you, and on that one you face people."

This:
http://www.rcdb.com/236.htm?p=319

Mike B.

Big Dipper would be an excellent addition to KI, Mike.

I don't like the GCI woodie because GCI's have not aged well at all. Even the coasters that started off with PTCs that now use MF's are rough and not re-rideable.

With the size of that area, it'd be nice to add some water rides over on that side of the park. Coaster wise, I think a Euro Fighter would be an excellent addition to that park.

Joe
Great_Ump

Wouldn't the guests of KI be mad that their world-record breaking wooden coaster was removed for the Big Dipper?. I would put the Big Dipper in, just not in SOB's former old location. I would move Hydra from Dorney, and sent it to KI and put it in SOB's old location. I would replace Hydra with Nighthawk from Carowinds. I would then replace Nighthawk with a floorless or launched coaster of some sort.

* This post was modified at 8/10/12 4:12:10 PM *

How 'bout trying to make the tallest and fastest wooden coaster (again), but this time doing it RIGHT!!

-I don't like the GCI woodie because GCI's have not aged well at all. Even the coasters that started off with PTCs that now use MF's are rough and not re-rideable.

Really?

I can understand in regards to Wildcat and Gwazi that the PTC's that they started out with damaged the track. I'm pretty sure neither coaster was re-tracked when the switch was made to MF's either, leading to the rides remaining rough. But I can only speak for myself when I say I have never read any reports of ANY GCI coaster that started out with MF's being currently rough. Lightning Racer is 12 years old and I rode it a few weeks ago and it was almost as smooth as it was back in 2000. I am also convinced that if the MF's were to be the trains SOB started out with it most likely would still be running today.

With that being said, are there reports of uncomfortable roughness on any GCI at the current time other than Wildcat, Roar East, or Gwazi?

Gwazi did have track work done.
I rode it this past February, my first time with the MF trains.

IMO: Trackwork + MF trains = damn! Still rough.

Mike B.

Geauga_Dog said:

If they were to go the giga route I'd want to see something along the lines of I-305 and not another Beemer.

Now G-Dog, have you been on Leviathan? ;) I wouldn't have a problem with that type of ride replacing Son of Beast. The B&M giga in Toronto was amazing in my opinion. Granted I have not been on I-305, and I am sure it's a great ride, but I doubt anyone would be disappointed with a Leviathan style ride at KI.

Although now after seeing SDC's new looping woodie, I wouldn't mind seeing something like that show up. Son of Beast's Revenge perhaps?

ray_p said:

Now G-Dog, have you been on Leviathan? ;) I wouldn't have a problem with that type of ride replacing Son of Beast. The B&M giga in Toronto was amazing in my opinion. Granted I have not been on I-305, and I am sure it's a great ride, but I doubt anyone would be disappointed with a Leviathan style ride at KI.

Ray, I haven't been on Leviathan, heck I don't have a passport or else I would have planned a trip to Wonderland (haven't been there since 2002) but I would have loved to have ridden it. It is a beautiful and amazing looking ride.

If KI were to build a B&M giga I wouldn't be disappointed, I'd be ecstatic, but I just figured KI doesn't have an Intamin coaster to round out its offerings. With the new, beefier track and lack of support structure Intamin has developed would help aid in creating more room for other attractions. They sure could use another water ride since Keelboat Canal disappeared a decade ago.

To fit a giga, IMO, may result in something having to be sacrificed to make it fit. The sheer size of the lift hill alone will take up a good chunk of that property. I doubt they would go into the parking lot with Flight Deck there or go the other way with Flight of Fear and Firehawk close by. Would anyone be willing to Photoshop Leviathan or I-305 into SOB's location just for kicks?

G-Dog

MABrider said:

Gwazi did have track work done.
I rode it this past February, my first time with the MF trains.

IMO: Trackwork + MF trains = damn! Still rough.

Mike B.

I 2nd that. Though still better than the ptc trains. Not the best ride in the world, but I'll live.

alpengeistno3 said:

d-lo775 said:

I totally agree with your reasoning of installing a B&M invert. That would be my personal preference and KI could use another high capacity ride. The only downside that I could see to that would be that the suspended and inverted boomerang would all be in the same section of the park.

There goes that "enthusiast talk" again. GP would not see any similarity between an invert and Top Gun or Face Off.

Paul

It's not just "enthusiast talk". It's management-type talk too. I agree that the GP won't care if there is an invert next to a suspended, next to a inverted boomerang.

But management is aware of that sort of thing, and I'm sure the conversation would come up. Whether or not it would impede them from actually building one there, is another question.

I say do it. The park does need that style of coaster, and Son of Beast's spot is perfect for such a ride. A new coaster in that spot would alleviate some of the Diamondback/Beast crowd. I'd love to see an Alpengeist-sized monster back there.

Franchise said:

-I don't like the GCI woodie because GCI's have not aged well at all. Even the coasters that started off with PTCs that now use MF's are rough and not re-rideable.

Really?

I can understand in regards to Wildcat and Gwazi that the PTC's that they started out with damaged the track. I'm pretty sure neither coaster was re-tracked when the switch was made to MF's either, leading to the rides remaining rough. But I can only speak for myself when I say I have never read any reports of ANY GCI coaster that started out with MF's being currently rough. Lightning Racer is 12 years old and I rode it a few weeks ago and it was almost as smooth as it was back in 2000. I am also convinced that if the MF's were to be the trains SOB started out with it most likely would still be running today.

With that being said, are there reports of uncomfortable roughness on any GCI at the current time other than Wildcat, Roar East, or Gwazi?

Really!

I've been on Wildcat and LR this year myself and Wildcat has always been rough.

I haven't been on Roar East this year though SFA is my home park and I've logged hundreds, if not thousands of rides on Roar. Over the past three years or so, Roar has really become unrideable. The park hasn't given Roar the TLC that it needs and it shows in the ride experience.

I enjoy a rough wooden coaster. I love KD's Grizzly in the back, Voyage in the back, but there are a handful of woodies that I would not ride anywhere on (Wildcat, Hurler, Predator at Darien, Mean Streak, and now Roar East).

I've been on Gwazi before and after the reprofiling and new trains and never really enjoyed Gwazi in either form.

Lightning Racer is the exception to the GCI rule. I haven't experienced any other MF from the start GCIs, but I'm now more biased towards Gravity Group.

If I'm a park owner buying new wood, Gravity Group is who I want to design my coaster.

Joe
Great_Ump

Great_Ump said:

Franchise said:

-I don't like the GCI woodie because GCI's have not aged well at all. Even the coasters that started off with PTCs that now use MF's are rough and not re-rideable.

Really?

I can understand in regards to Wildcat and Gwazi that the PTC's that they started out with damaged the track. I'm pretty sure neither coaster was re-tracked when the switch was made to MF's either, leading to the rides remaining rough. But I can only speak for myself when I say I have never read any reports of ANY GCI coaster that started out with MF's being currently rough. Lightning Racer is 12 years old and I rode it a few weeks ago and it was almost as smooth as it was back in 2000. I am also convinced that if the MF's were to be the trains SOB started out with it most likely would still be running today.

With that being said, are there reports of uncomfortable roughness on any GCI at the current time other than Wildcat, Roar East, or Gwazi?

Really!

I've been on Wildcat and LR this year myself and Wildcat has always been rough.

I haven't been on Roar East this year though SFA is my home park and I've logged hundreds, if not thousands of rides on Roar. Over the past three years or so, Roar has really become unrideable. The park hasn't given Roar the TLC that it needs and it shows in the ride experience.

I enjoy a rough wooden coaster. I love KD's Grizzly in the back, Voyage in the back, but there are a handful of woodies that I would not ride anywhere on (Wildcat, Hurler, Predator at Darien, Mean Streak, and now Roar East).

I've been on Gwazi before and after the reprofiling and new trains and never really enjoyed Gwazi in either form.

Lightning Racer is the exception to the GCI rule. I haven't experienced any other MF from the start GCIs, but I'm now more biased towards Gravity Group.

If I'm a park owner buying new wood, Gravity Group is who I want to design my coaster.

Joe
Great_Ump

Totally agreed on the Gravity Group. The only one I've ridden was the Voyage and it's still my favorite coaster, even over El Toro, Bizzaro, and Skyrush. I even prefer CCI coasters over GCI, simply because they have a nastier bite to them, which I feel wooden coasters should have. I absolutely HATE when people think they're family rides, they are not. They are always more intense pound for pound than steel coasters. However I'm still wondering if anyone can confirm of any GCI's that opened with MF's that are currently rough?

* This post was modified at 8/11/12 11:27:34 PM *

Agree with you 100 percent about the wood being WAY more intense than any steel coasters!!Most of these new steel coasters are forceless!!

To te person who said an Alpengeist sized ride, maybe it's me but I'd much prefer Montu as a design inspiration. It to me feels like a more complete ride. As long as they put in a long (capacity monster) coaster I'm game.

And even though the ride is fun and popular I to this day never understand a park with their attendance numbers installs a shuttle coaster.

coastinj said:
And even though the ride is fun and popular I to this day never understand a park with their attendance numbers installs a shuttle coaster.

The invertigo happened to be what was available that could fit into a small space and cost about what they had to spend. Plus it was gimmicky in an era when Paramount was buying gimmicky rides.

$40M had been approved for building the Action Zone, with 25 budgeted for SOB and another 8 for the drop tower that had originally been planned for the flight commander site. What was left was enough for a shuttle so they squeezed it into the corner of the parking lot.

I have given this a lot of thought. A wing rider is probably the coaster that will be built. If the decision were up to me I would build the tallest, fastest, dive coaster, with at least 4 inversions. There aren't many in existence and none of the current operating dive coasters are located at Cedar Fair parks. Build it at least 250 ft. tall. I know the cost would be outrageous, but you would have a coaster that would be marketed to the GP and enthusiasts. The only other 2 dive coasters in the US are located at the Busch parks. This would be only the third in the US, so that means it's rare and unique. Another thing you get when purchasing a B&M is a coaster that is smooth and reliable, something SOB lacked. This would be the type of coaster that would draw people from Indianapolis, Louisville, and other large cities. It would pay for itself in the first year of operation.

As for the GCI woodies discussion, here is my take. Prowler, American Thunder, Thunderhead, and Lighting Racer are super smooth. Kentucky Rumbler and Renegade run aggressive, but still smooth. Wildcat and Roar at SF America are rough. The last time I rode Gwazi was in 2001, so I don't know how rough it has gotten. In 2001 it was running aggressive, but very rideable. I do feel that Gravity Group and Intamin are building the best wooden coasters at the present time, but GCI is just a small step behind. If you're wanting to build an out and back wooden coaster, then GG or Intamin is the best choice. If you want a wooden twister, then GCI would be the best company. All 3 companies are great at what they do, and have brought the wooden coaster back into the coaster wars, over the last decade. Most of the best wooden coasters have been built recently. Now look at what Rocky Mountain is doing with Outlaw Run. Because of technology and innovation wooden coasters are not only smoother, but we are seeing elements that were only possible for steel coasters to make. Not long ago parks installed wooden coasters for financial reasons. Now they are installing them for marketing reasons.

* This post was modified at 8/12/12 11:00:38 AM *

Someone mentioned Montu (which I haven't ridden) but I'd gladly take something like Carowinds' Afterburn. Compact layout yet delivers an action packed ride from lift to brake.

As for a Dive Machine, I never actually thought about it since it feels like those rides are exclusively a Busch only coaster since there hasn't been another one built in the U.S. but that would definitely be something I'd love to see KI add. It would be an extremely unique and marketable ride for them and having Griffon's type of trains would make it the high capacity ride the park needs.

The only thing about a dive machine is that the splash pool is major part of the ride and Diamondback already has that. How could they make it different yet give the ride an effective ending?

G-Dog

I've never been to KI, but for DB, is that pool enclosed or can ppl stand around/next to it and get soaked? To me that's what makes Sheikra great, the pool splash zone. Griffon as a ride and capacity is better, but I wished that ride's pool was more accessible.

coastinj said:

To te person who said an Alpengeist sized ride, maybe it's me but I'd much prefer Montu as a design inspiration. It to me feels like a more complete ride. As long as they put in a long (capacity monster) coaster I'm game.

Same here. I've rode both Montu and Alpengeist, but I still love montu more. I think that if Alpengeist had a similar 2nd half after the MCB like Montu, it would be a closer call. But I will say Alp's height was very cool.

=
As for people saying Intamin is not ideal or to that degree.. why? Imo, (and speaking as a B&M fan) I can't really fault them for Hershey's skyrush as Hershey didn't want to put that coaster on a bigger land and instead tried to cram it in on top of an existing coaster. It maybe nice Hershey likes to keep their old coasters, but they really should have either removed/moved some rides out to give SR the space it deserved.

I305, I dunno who was the one that approved the quick transitions (left right style like on a Maverick type coaster), but they really botched it with the old otsr the way they chopped at your neck at the turns. I also wonder why they didn't go with an overbank like with MF. I think it would've been a better idea to go with an overbanked turn than just raising the elevation of the first turn up to the 2nd hill. So this one could be on either the park and/or Intamin.

Cyclone_Phil said:I've never been to KI, but for DB, is that pool enclosed or can ppl stand around/next to it and get soaked?

You can't get near the splash pool for Diamonback. That was one thing CF botched up and could have upped the excitement level of the ride as there is plenty of land to put in a small path next to it. The closest you can get is while in Rivertown you walk under the drop that leads to the splash down.

G-Dog

Damn, what a shame... Agreed, that is a missed opportunity there. imo, having a splash pool is useless unless you can stand under it to get soaked.

Geauga_Dog said:

Cyclone_Phil said:I've never been to KI, but for DB, is that pool enclosed or can ppl stand around/next to it and get soaked?

You can't get near the splash pool for Diamonback. That was one thing CF botched up and could have upped the excitement level of the ride as there is plenty of land to put in a small path next to it. The closest you can get is while in Rivertown you walk under the drop that leads to the splash down.

G-Dog

Sounds like a future UPCHARGE option for CF. LOL

Re: Montu - Montu is my favorite invert. Hands down. The batwing element is awesome. I was fortunate enough to ride Montu in '96 before the MCBR was amped up and Montu was the one right that blew me away as a young enthusiast at the time.

Joe
Great_Ump

Cyclone_Phil said:

I305, I dunno who was the one that approved the quick transitions (left right style like on a Maverick type coaster), but they really botched it with the old otsr the way they chopped at your neck at the turns. I also wonder why they didn't go with an overbank like with MF. I think it would've been a better idea to go with an overbanked turn than just raising the elevation of the first turn up to the 2nd hill. So this one could be on either the park and/or Intamin.

I-305 was clearly the coaster that was designed to use the Earnhardt license the most effectively (of the 2 Intimidators). The low to the ground turns were something that I'm sure the park insisted upon to maximize the faithfulness to that license. In hindsight, I am sure they wish they had went with an overbank, but their thing was to make sure the ride felt fast at ground level and overbanks would take away that illusion.

I wonder just how much Intamin knew about how the finished product would perform. I'm sure the KD suits wanted to stick with their "vision", but if Intamin sat them down and said "you know, the G forces in this turn are REALLY forceful. Are you sure you wish to subject riders and the wheels to this knowing we had initial issues with that Cedar Point roller coaster?" and they went ahead with it, then the park is more to blame than Intamin. In my opinion, I'm not convinced Intamin knew this until Spring 2010, which is inexcusable considering the technology that is claimed to be available.

KI would be wise to stay away from them for a replacement for the infamously troubled SOB.

Paul

* This post was modified at 8/12/12 6:32:07 PM *

I think they need to add something of similar proportion to SOB. It opened as the tallest, fastest wooden coaster and the only one with an inversion. That was a BIG DEAL. It's kind of a failure on their part that they have to resort to tearing it down. It would be borderline embarrassing for KI to replace it with a smaller wooden coaster. I think if they can, a huge dive machine would fit well. With or without a splash pool. They can theme it enough to not need a splash pool.
I think if they went with an invert it should be something record-breaking otherwise it won't be attractive enough to claim the spot of this previously all-record breaking beast. Whatever they do I have a feeling it's going to be something of big proportions to make up for that failure.

Ps about i305 - if they put an overbanked turn hill like on MF it would lose some momentum so they didn't want to do it. Every time you go up a hill and then back down ur losing kinetic energy, so the rest of the ride would have been a little bit slower. What's wrong with the low-to-the-ground sudden turns? They are the best! Intamin would be good.

^^^I'll be all for a dive machine at KI, but it seems like no one in the US has the kahunas to build one, so I'm giving up my hopes for more new US dive machines (and 4D coasters) LOL.

@tomes: the problem with I305 was the old restraints that were hard thin plastic*. When you made a quick left-right transition and are not fully braced (like keeping your arms in the air) you will get the 'neck chopping feeling. And they can be painful. So with the new softer 'v' restraint, I think the ride is as close to perfect as it will get.

*I think that had the original thin plastic restraints were thicker like on B&M otsr, it would've been a little more tolerable.

alpengeistno3 said:

Cyclone_Phil said:

I305, I dunno who was the one that approved the quick transitions (left right style like on a Maverick type coaster), but they really botched it with the old otsr the way they chopped at your neck at the turns. I also wonder why they didn't go with an overbank like with MF. I think it would've been a better idea to go with an overbanked turn than just raising the elevation of the first turn up to the 2nd hill. So this one could be on either the park and/or Intamin.

I-305 was clearly the coaster that was designed to use the Earnhardt license the most effectively (of the 2 Intimidators). The low to the ground turns were something that I'm sure the park insisted upon to maximize the faithfulness to that license. In hindsight, I am sure they wish they had went with an overbank, but their thing was to make sure the ride felt fast at ground level and overbanks would take away that illusion.

I wonder just how much Intamin knew about how the finished product would perform. I'm sure the KD suits wanted to stick with their "vision", but if Intamin sat them down and said "you know, the G forces in this turn are REALLY forceful. Are you sure you wish to subject riders and the wheels to this knowing we had initial issues with that Cedar Point roller coaster?" and they went ahead with it, then the park is more to blame than Intamin. In my opinion, I'm not convinced Intamin knew this until Spring 2010, which is inexcusable considering the technology that is claimed to be available.

KI would be wise to stay away from them for a replacement for the infamously troubled SOB.

Paul

Interesting. That does make sense about keeping the train close to the ground. Also agreed about I305 being a better fit for #3 than B&M's I232 which is basically like any other hypers they've built.
Yeah, I would think the manufacturer should've had more input as they are building the ride even if the park is pressuring them to build to their requirements.
Hem, no Intamin for KI? Even if it was almost a clone of El toro?

Well just 1 more week for me to see how much of a difference those new restraints feels. To be honest, though I did grey out once on the first turn, I didn't think it was that bad, but if it helped get rid of the trims down the 1st drop, I'm not complaining.

* This post was modified at 8/13/12 12:02:59 AM *

I've been told that it's already a done deal that it will be a B&M 300ft in 2014 (friend of a maintenance manager said so).

I don't know the employee personally, so can't vouch for their accuracy, but it sounds logical.

Intamin seems to have shot themselves in the foot unfortunately.

Cyclone_Phil said:

Hem, no Intamin for KI? Even if it was almost a clone of El toro?

As good as El Toro turned out, it was not without its own share of "Intamin problems" its opening year. KI does not need any problems after ridding themselves of the stain that was SOB. Intamin is fine, but not for that spot.

Paul

alpengeistno3 said:

I-305 was clearly the coaster that was designed to use the Earnhardt license the most effectively (of the 2 Intimidators). The low to the ground turns were something that I'm sure the park insisted upon to maximize the faithfulness to that license.

Oh right, cause NASCAR racing feature sharp banked turns to the RIGHT?!?!

alpengeistno3 said:

In hindsight, I am sure they wish they had went with an overbank, but their thing was to make sure the ride felt fast at ground level and overbanks would take away that illusion.

I'm pretty confident their "thing" was to introduce a product that hadn't been produced in the states in over 10 years and put it in a market saturated with southern hilbilly Nascar loving rednecks (no offense) where people would come out in droves (see what I did there?) to ride their $25 million investment.

alpengeistno3 said:

I wonder just how much Intamin knew about how the finished product would perform. I'm sure the KD suits wanted to stick with their "vision", but if Intamin sat them down and said "you know, the G forces in this turn are REALLY forceful. Are you sure you wish to subject riders and the wheels to this knowing we had initial issues with that Cedar Point roller coaster?" and they went ahead with it, then the park is more to blame than Intamin. In my opinion, I'm not convinced Intamin knew this until Spring 2010, which is inexcusable considering the technology that is claimed to be available.

At the end of the day, isn't all semantics anyway?

What is with you and all these conspiracy theories?

I guess you'd blame Intamin too for failure to get Volcano opened on time in '98 when the park didn't have enough power to get the ride up and running too right?

If I paid $25 million for new coaster, I'd want it to run perfectly. If having to adjust the ride layout slightly and add misting nozzles to the track in the station to "cool" the wheels down was the solution then I'd do everything in my power to get it right.

I find it interesting that designing these rides isn't an exact science. There are external factors that a computer based program still doesn't have the ability to forecast.

Joe
Great_Ump

Kevin_Page said:

I've been told that it's already a done deal that it will be a B&M 300ft in 2014 (friend of a maintenance manager said so).

I don't know the employee personally, so can't vouch for their accuracy, but it sounds logical.

Intamin seems to have shot themselves in the foot unfortunately.

If this is true, I'm totally excited. Even though they have Diamondback, you can't go wrong with a giga coaster. I haven't ridden Leviathan, and I won't get to until next year. I haven't read a bad review of Leviathan, yet. This would be something very marketable and a priority for us in 2014. I just hope it holds to be true.

Stop the presses I have the definitive answer. Remove the prized coaster from Canada's Wonderland and place it on SOB's tombstone. That coaster prized coaster is none other than Tomb Raider/Time Warp. Now that is one quality peice of engineering coaster marvel that Canda would be giving up on. Anything for our American neighbours.

Regards,
Kevin "said to see it go" Reid

KevinReid said:

Stop the presses I have the definitive answer. Remove the prized coaster from Canada's Wonderland and place it on SOB's tombstone. That coaster prized coaster is none other than Tomb Raider/Time Warp. Now that is one quality peice of engineering coaster marvel that Canda would be giving up on. Anything for our American neighbours.

Regards,
Kevin "said to see it go" Reid

Boo. Hiss.

KevinReid said:

Stop the presses I have the definitive answer. Remove the prized coaster from Canada's Wonderland and place it on SOB's tombstone. That coaster prized coaster is none other than Tomb Raider/Time Warp. Now that is one quality peice of engineering coaster marvel that Canda would be giving up on. Anything for our American neighbours.

Kevin, I believe you missed your calling as a stand-up comedian. That was absolutely hilarious! Thanks for the laugh... I needed it today!

Great_Ump said:

alpengeistno3 said:

I-305 was clearly the coaster that was designed to use the Earnhardt license the most effectively (of the 2 Intimidators). The low to the ground turns were something that I'm sure the park insisted upon to maximize the faithfulness to that license.

Oh right, cause NASCAR racing feature sharp banked turns to the RIGHT?!?!

I did say "of the 2 Intimidators". You obviously missed that part! And if you knew anything about ride theming, you would know that recreating a NASCAR track LITERALLY on a coaster would be pretty boring. The idea was to expand on the idea (and create a thrilling coaster ride).

Great_Ump said:

alpengeistno3 said:

In hindsight, I am sure they wish they had went with an overbank, but their thing was to make sure the ride felt fast at ground level and overbanks would take away that illusion.

I'm pretty confident their "thing" was to introduce a product that hadn't been produced in the states in over 10 years and put it in a market saturated with southern hilbilly Nascar loving rednecks (no offense) where people would come out in droves (see what I did there?) to ride their $25 million investment.

And try to reproduce the "feel of riding with Dale around the track". Once again, you missed that part, too. Oh, and one does not need to be a redneck to enjoy Nascar. I know plenty who aren't.

Great_Ump said:

alpengeistno3 said:

I wonder just how much Intamin knew about how the finished product would perform. I'm sure the KD suits wanted to stick with their "vision", but if Intamin sat them down and said "you know, the G forces in this turn are REALLY forceful. Are you sure you wish to subject riders and the wheels to this knowing we had initial issues with that Cedar Point roller coaster?" and they went ahead with it, then the park is more to blame than Intamin. In my opinion, I'm not convinced Intamin knew this until Spring 2010, which is inexcusable considering the technology that is claimed to be available.

At the end of the day, isn't all semantics anyway?

What is with you and all these conspiracy theories?

You don't watch many coaster shows, do you, Joe? They show where the CAD programs can predict the G-force and speed along any portion of the track. (I'd check my tapes for the exact show so you could youtube it if I wasn't too busy getting ready for school next week. You're a "smart" guy. You can look it up!)

Great_Ump said:

I guess you'd blame Intamin too for failure to get Volcano opened on time in '98 when the park didn't have enough power to get the ride up and running too right?

Volcano was a innovative new ride-type that had never been executed before in '98. Sadly, Intimidator 305 was not.

Great_Ump said:

If I paid $25 million for new coaster, I'd want it to run perfectly. If having to adjust the ride layout slightly and add misting nozzles to the track in the station to "cool" the wheels down was the solution then I'd do everything in my power to get it right.

True, but the fact that you paid $25 for it and the company that you paid "didn't know" that you would need those additions after testing it for 30 days before handing it over to you as a "completed" project has got to be a little unsettling. Would you buy a new Dodge Dart after you were told the engine might explode? Really?!?!

Great_Ump said:

I find it interesting that designing these rides isn't an exact science. There are external factors that a computer based program still doesn't have the ability to forecast.

True, but we know of several companies that don't seem to have this as a recurring problem. (How many ejections was that again that B&M has had?) Do we really need to rehash the list of Intamin "inexact science" blunders again, Joe? (I know there is a thread or 2 on that around here somewhere.)

Paul

^I love bickering with you Paul.

Let's just leave it at that.

Joe
Great_Ump

ps- it's so easy to get you going!!