Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

The Six Flags Magic Mountain (SFMM) Discussion Thread

Page 2218 - Wonder Woman Roller Coaster for 2022!

Recommended Posts

Actually. Both Texas Giant and the Rattler were shortened. With Rattler loosing quite a bit more than giant.

 

Shortened yes, but not so drastically. Rattler lost a lot just by losing that ridiculous never-ending helix, but it still occupies the same space that the helix occupied. It's not like a whole section of the original layout is just missing.

 

Remember that colossus had three very slow turnarounds but this new coaster will fly. Without increasing the lift drastically, you wouldn't have enough kinetic energy to perform all of the maneuvers and retain the speed

 

From the video, it looks like this ride will fly thru the layout. And it looks fantastic!

 

Also notice the train flying over halfway up the second lift hill. Lots of speed not being used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^I highly doubt the decision of ride length was left up to RMC. SF just cheaped out, they got their inversions and new elements to market the ride and spent half as much as if they'd used the entire layout. Same reason Full Throttle has nothing to the layout but a launch to get it through the loop and a launch to get it back to the station.

 

I hate sounding so negative, I do think it's going to be a great ride. I just feel like we need to give a nod to reality here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Your reality though, because I'm not hearing these criticisms from anyone else, and most of us were quite critical of FT only to go on and enjoy it.

 

As Robb has said, this ride is going to be so much better than what was there, it makes no sense to me to continually complain that the most boring parts of the old ride are missing, all while giving a free pass to Rattler which did the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I am hearing is how it could have been more, when in all reality every coaster could have more. Fury 325 could have more snappy twists, Maverick could have kept the barrel roll, B&M could add more airtime, and a Wacky Worm could be taller. What matters is if what they have for the coaster works as a whole.

 

What I don't get is they actually HAVE kept most of the structure that was used, the thing is TC doesn't go through any of the turns again, and the small hills near the end of Colossus is all the structure they are chopping off, which to me is completely fine. The only real difference is instead of having two separate coasters go around the structure twice while losing momentum, this is one coaster that goes around the structure twice while keeping the momentum strong with two lifts. The pacing might be off with two lifts, but at least your getting a hauling-a$$ part 2 instead of the ride still going and you wishing the ride would just end already because you're bored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^That's definitely another way to look at it, though I still suspect they could have kept up the pacing and intensity while still keeping it a double out-and-back (errr quadruple out-and-back?). But on the bright side, another thing no one's pointed out is if you really fly up the second lift like it shows in the video, it probably won't be nearly as much of a pace killer as it might seem (you'll be halfway up it before you even slow down). Assuming they don't slow the top of it way down for dueling purposes. No way to know till it opens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to get off topic but yesterday I found the worlds worst invention while exiting Apocalypse, Croc Bags. Yes, bags that look like and are made from the same materials as Crocs. I don't even.

 

[attachment=0]Lg g2 676.jpg[/attachment]

 

[attachment=1]Lg g2 677.jpg[/attachment]

 

The bags are the same colors as the tracks for tc lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rattler lost a lot just by losing that ridiculous never-ending helix, but it still occupies the same space that the helix occupied. It's not like a whole section of the original layout is just missing.

 

Actually, it is missing a whole section from the original ride, as is Texas Giant.

 

Could've made a longer ride that still didn't have any dead space.

 

Alright Mr. Engineer, please do the math and re-design this sucker for us.

 

I just feel like we need to give a nod to reality here.

 

Your reality

 

not hearing these criticisms from anyone else

 

I hate sounding so negative, I do think it's going to be a great ride.

 

If you think it's going to be a great ride, then why are you bitching about it? Who cares if it could have been longer? The parts they cut out where basically dead spaces in the original ride and they probably couldn't do anything innovative with the structure that those elements utilized. Personally, I'm amazed they were able to take this 1970's layout, and turn into something that is very modern and innovative. The same goes with Wicked Cyclone.

Edited by ZeroGravity55
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The dueling aspect makes the 2 lifts design worthwhile. Otherwise still interesting but not quite as good as their single lift designs.

 

If your train gets to the second lift, and the next train hasn't dispatched, will you stop on the lift and wait? Maybe it will "skip" and let you go on through, but then make the next train wait to try so it has a chance to get a duel. In other words, there will never be 2 trains on the track running out of sync, they will be in sync (or close) or only one train on the track. And typically when a "skip" occurs it will still duel for the first or second half, just not both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I dont think many people here understand is cost. Ideally, businesses want to get the most for less. The designer drafts several layout ideas, and then they discuss the options with the client. What's the best, optimal solution? What's the most marketable?

 

More likely than not, there probably were older drafts that took up the entire original layout. They were probably more expensive. Think Texas Giant - they cut out the helix, and no excitement was really lost from the ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think it's going to be a great ride, then why are you bitching about it? Who cares if it could have been longer? The parts they cut out where basically dead spaces in the original ride and they probably couldn't do anything innovative with the structure that those elements utilized. Personally, I'm amazed they were able to take this 1970's layout, and turn into something that is very modern and innovative. The same goes with Wicked Cyclone.

 

I'm only responding because you asked me a question, so I'll answer it. I care. And if you think I'm the only one who's pointed this out then you haven't been reading very carefully. There was a lot of dead space in the track they DID utilize, nothing about the track getting bulldozed would've made it harder to use.

 

I find it interesting that this thread for a long time has been the most concentrated source of Six Flags bashing on the entire forum. Now we're seeing a project with obvious squandered potential and, for some reason, most people seem to be willing to give them a pass. It is in fact possible to like what you're getting and be happy, AND recognize that it could've been so much more. It's not an either/or.

 

EDIT: Although most people are also being very pessimistic about the operations of this ride. I guess that's where the SF bashing comes back in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I've learned in my years on the internet is no matter how amazing something is, there will not only still be whiners, but they'll usually still be the vocal majority.

 

 

We should consider ourselves lucky that there are only a few like that in this thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think it's going to be a great ride, then why are you bitching about it? Who cares if it could have been longer? The parts they cut out where basically dead spaces in the original ride and they probably couldn't do anything innovative with the structure that those elements utilized. Personally, I'm amazed they were able to take this 1970's layout, and turn into something that is very modern and innovative. The same goes with Wicked Cyclone.

 

I'm only responding because you asked me a question, so I'll answer it. I care. And if you think I'm the only one who's pointed this out then you haven't been reading very carefully. There was a lot of dead space in the track they DID utilize, nothing about the track getting bulldozed would've made it harder to use.

 

I find it interesting that this thread for a long time has been the most concentrated source of Six Flags bashing on the entire forum. Now we're seeing a project with obvious squandered potential and, for some reason, most people seem to be willing to give them a pass. It is in fact possible to like what you're getting and be happy, AND recognize that it could've been so much more. It's not an either/or.

 

EDIT: Although most people are also being very pessimistic about the operations of this ride. I guess that's where the SF bashing comes back in.

 

I think most people can separate a great ride from a company with a great track record from a lousy park

 

Imo, this is the most exciting ride SFMM has added since X. We all get that it could have been longer, but the awesomeness by far outweighs the nitpicking. That's why you're not getting much support.

 

It's the same comments we got when Outlaw Run and El Toro were announced in regards to length vs height. And we can see how that turned out.

 

Colossus is closed for good. This is a brand new ride. The original stats are no more. Time to move forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it interesting and sad really that no matter what people get, it is never enough. Yes this could have been longer, but it won't be and it will still be amazing. Obvious squandered potential? Perhaps, but who cares (well apparently somebody lets it bother them). I almost wish this ride was just turned into a parking lot so these people, who could never be pleased because 'everything is never enough' for them, would be happy. Oh wait, that's right, YOU are the engineer that designed this ride so you know everything about it and why, which means you would also know why DEAD PARTS had to be removed to make it awesome...... being the engineer that designed this ride, you know all that stuff. Oh wait, that's right, you're not.

 

Doesn't matter how good or cool or amazing something is, somebody will always nit-pick it to death.

 

Gotta love the internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People thought El Toro was short? When did that happen?

 

Oh yeah. You have to remember that El Toro was new the same year that The Voyage was new. People saw 6,400 vs 4,400 and wondered about the total length of the ride, espcially when El Toro was taller and faster.

 

Twisted Colossus doesn't need to be identical in layout (double oval) or length for it to be a fantastic ride. It's part of the reason why I dislike calling Iron Horse projects as "renovations" when they are in reality closer to brand new projects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People thought El Toro was short? When did that happen?

 

Oh yeah. You have to remember that El Toro was new the same year that The Voyage was new. People saw 6,400 vs 4,400 and wondered about the total length of the ride, espcially when El Toro was taller and faster.

 

What's funny is...I absolutely think Toro is short. There are five ejector hills. All five are gonzo-insane, but there are five.

 

The coasters I have above Toro, T Express and Voyage, each have like...15 ejector hills? I don't even think they're in the same category as Toro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/