singforfood

1940s: Thunderbolt at SFNE - Rode it just for the credit, and then I actually loved it. Still a lot of fun. 1950s: Matterhorn at Disneyland (before the refurb that totally ruined it) 1970s: Space Mountain and Disneyland - Seriously though, it's one of the all time greats. 1980s: Ninja - SFMM It's the only 1980s coaster I've ever been on, but it's still legitimately pretty cool. 1990s: Batman: The Ride - Still a ton of fun, even 20 years later 2000s: El Toro at SFGAdv - I haven't screamed (and I mean SCREAMED) like that on a coaster before or since. I refuse to pick from 2010s, cuz my only credit is YOLO and I will absolutely not allow that anywhere near my "favorites"

Seriously. Those are awful names, especially TC They should have called it "The New Colossus" instead. Six Flags just can't remodel a coaster then call it "New (insert ride's name here), that is just as bad putting some brand/property and adding the words "The Ride" to it. If you ask me I think Six Flags is running low on ideas for new ride names instead recycling old ones (like Goliath) and/or putting the words "Chaos Coaster" to a Super Loop flat ride! Colossus2

Seriously. Those are awful names, especially TC

People have been hoping that would happen for years. I agree totally, but I also get where the park is coming from. It's so massively out of the way for pretty much everyone in the LA/OC/IE population centers that the park needs to continually create new experiences to come back for. It's hard to create an ad campaign around park quality improvements, and if Six Flags invested a bunch of money doing so, it would be unlikely to see that money return at the ticket booths for a long time. It's not enough of an incentive for people to make the 40-70 mile drive (on the 5, which ALWAYS has traffic) to spend a day there, when there are so many other entertainment options. A new coaster, however, can generate a lot of buzz and ticket sales. I agree that the park has allowed quality to suffer in exchange for thrills, but I understand where its priorities come from.

Hear, hear!

I always thought Pepsi Max Big One was the most God awful name for a ride. Not only is it awkward and unyielding to pronounce, but... the product placement. Fury 325 is my new 2nd place winner (loser?). I pretty sure I'm the only one who doesn't hate Scream as a ride title. As generic as it sounds, it's the only ride on RCDB with that name (others include the word but in different versions... CA Screamin, Screamer, Scream Machine, etc).

I was a bit underwhelmed by Nitro at SFGAdv. It's a very good example of my issue with most B&M hypers.... the pacing is so slow. The heights and top speeds are high, but the constant deceleration going over the tall hills and turnarounds made it feel like the roller coaster equivalent of stop and go traffic. I really wanted to like Bizarro (formerly S:RoS) at SFNE, but the only time I ever got to ride it, the employees jammed my lapbar down SO HARD (like, literally leaned back so he could use his body momentum to shove it down) that I spent the whole ride distracted by how badly my thighs hurt.

Has anyone seen As Above So Below yet? Thoughts?

That would make sense for inverted coasters (like the aforementioned GIBS), but why would a normal sitdown ride (like Bizarro) need it? Likely because taller people generally have longer arms, so they can stretch out to the sides more, thus the clearance envelope will have to be increased. I can easily see how that will be an issue on RoS for example because when you exit the first helix it appears to be a very tight fit. I'm only 5'10" and even I put my hands down a couple times during that crossover. But my original question stands... Why, after years of operating without a maximum height limit, would one be added to an existing coaster? The clearance envelope didn't just spontaneously shrink.

^ This is my point exactly. Having a max height limit doesn't make any sense from a safety standpoint when there's no consistency to it, even within rides that are legit clones of each other. Makes me believe more that it's a byproduct of "size limits" covering height as well as girth in order to not offend people.

For REAL. Disneyland isn't as big and doesn't have the massive hill and it still has the monorail and the train (and formerly the People Mover). The Orient Express is nice, but there definitely needs to be more than that.

Several might but definitely not all. CA Screamin has none, neither does Xcelerator, Kingda Ka, El Toro, Intimidator 305, Volcano (even though Wicked Twister is 6'6" and they are the same ride vehicles), Goliath at Wabili World, Expedition GeForce... the list goes on. And for whatever reason, Bizarro at SFNE and Ride of Steel at Darien Lake have a 6'4" limit instead of 6'6". As far as I know, when they opened as Superman, neither had a max limit.

I need to complain about something for a quick second. What's with the trend of parks imposing max height limits on rides that previously didn't have them? I understand that it's just part of the design limitations for certain rides (like Vekoma Giant Inverted Boomerangs), but why add one years after the fact (Bizarro at SFNE, Millennium Force)? I'm quite tall, but I fit into rides. I sit in the test seat and close the lap bar until the light turns green and have plenty of room to spare, but the sign says I'm 3 inches too tall to ride. I ride Xcelerator all the time, and I've never had a neck injury, despite my head reaching higher than most on the headrest. I think it may have something to do with accidents occurring because of guests who are of a larger girth not being able to secure themselves safely, but the parks don't want to seem discriminatory against overweight people, so they add a height maximum too to make it seem more even handed. Rant over. TL;DR: If I fits, how come I can't sits?

My vote is for GhostRider, which leads me to a question... Does anyone know, what exactly is it that happens to a ride (particularly a wood coaster) over the years that causes it to deteriorate so badly? GR was astonishing until about 2006, then it slowly started getting worse until about 2010 when it settled into the monstrosity it is today. What happens? Why? Is it something that's fixable / preventable? Seeing Knott's do a good amount of reinvesting in existing rides makes me hopeful that one day, GhostRider may return to it's former (non-trimmed) glory. Is that a reasonable thing to hope for?

I'm sure we can agree that Jammer was WAY better than Jet Stream though.

You physically wince every time someone refers to a coaster as "The ___ "

I think the 2 for 1 idea behind TC is really cool, but the problem is.... because it's more of a racing coaster that has moments of dueling, (vs a true dueling coaster like Dragons or Gwazi), you're basically going on the same ride twice in a row. The only major difference between the two tracks is the barrel roll vs the "top gun stall". Also, the timing is going to be an absolute nightmare, considering how good park guests are at screwing up basic things like loading and unloading a train. Also, am I the only one who heard 128 feet and though "really, that's it?" Seems so short for a place like Magic Mountain. Who knows, maybe this is a sign of maturity that they aren't putting out a stupid ride just to break another world record (*cough Full Throttle *cough* Bring back Log Jammer *cough*)