coasterbear30 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 To the guy that said Goliath (SFOG) is not a hyper, what gives...it is 200 feet tall. Why do people keep saying it is not a hyper? As far as junior hypers, isn't the correct term mega lite? Like Piraten? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atem122 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Mega lites are a brand name, like kleenex. Hypers below 200 feet are mega coasters, since the qualification to be a hyper coaster is 200 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electerik Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Hypers below 200 feet are mega coasters, since the qualification to be a hyper coaster is 200 feet. Dude, it's all made up anyway--mostly by us (enthusiasts). The first hyper (Magnum) just happened to be over 200-feet tall, so we threw that in as a "requirement." And it made sense for a while, when all the new ones were also over 200-feet. But it's completely artificial. We all know what a hypercoaster is, even if we don't happen to have our tape measures with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchboogie3 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 I believe that Hyper and Mega are one in the same, if used generically. Like I posted before, the correct generic label for a 100'-199' coaster would be kilo-coaster. B&M and Intamin do their own thing, B&M used to call fast, tall, air-time filled, no-looping coasters Mega coasters, but then changed to Hypercoaster. Intamin is a little more classical as it uses Giga, Mega, and Mega lite. When I mention Goliath at SFOG, I meant that it doesn't have a 200'+ drop. Yes, it is 200' above ground, but the drop is only 170', thus not qualifying for a hypercoaster (but yes, B&M calls it a Hypercoaster). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downunder Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 I agree that hyper is just a label, who cares as long as it is a good coaster. I've clocked 300 credits, and my top 5 coasters are all under 200 foot, and 4 of them barely over 100 feet. I'm looking forward to see Carowinds gets, it's a shame I'll be there a year early but I'll be pleasantly surprised if it's anything too far out of the ordinary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atem122 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Maybe it's just all a conspiracy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAMER3K Posted June 5, 2009 Author Share Posted June 5, 2009 Maybe it's just all a conspiracy... I wouldn't call TWO new B&M's a conspiracy...I'd call it a mystery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atem122 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Maybe it's just all a conspiracy... I wouldn't call TWO new B&M's a conspiracy...I'd call it a mystery. I was talking about the mega/hyper classification Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downunder Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Bolliger & Mabillard call them hypers in their product catalogue: http://www.bolliger-mabillard.com/products/hyper_en.aspx Intamin have Giga, Mega & Mega Lite (less calories for all you ACErs) in their product catalogue: http://www.intaminworldwide.com/iag/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=22&Itemid=32 I think it's a conspiracy to create confusion and debate amongst coaster enthusiasts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchboogie3 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Yes, all companies label their coasters, I was referring to the overarching, general labels. I just like to keep my labels specific, otherwise it tends to lose meaning. I like knowing that any coaster referred to as a Mega/Hypercoaster is 200-299 feet. It just gets confusing when it starts getting thrown around with 150' coasters too. Don't forget too, Mega/hypercoasters were labels that were around before Intamin and B&M started to use them. But yes, It really doesn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterbear30 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 So is Apollo's Chariot not a hyper either since it's lift is only 170 feet tall even though the drop is 210 feet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netdvn Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 ^ AC could be a hyper depending on what your definition of hyper is... Here's how I classify hypers/gigas/stratas... 200-299 ft - Hyper/Mega 300-399 ft - Giga 400-499 ft - Strata It makes it much easier to classify this way. Other than that, I tend to go with manufacturer names (Mega-Lite for Intamin, etc). If the coaster has a 100 ft lift, and a 200 foot drop, I still consider it a hyper. I'll even classify Griffon, Moonsault Scramble, and SOB to be hypers as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electerik Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 If the coaster has a 100 ft lift, and a 200 foot drop, I still consider it a hyper. I'll even classify Griffon, Moonsault Scramble, and SOB to be hypers as well. Which really makes no sense. Again, we all know what we mean when we say "hypercoaster." If someone told me their favorite hypercoaster was Steel Eel, I would be totally okay with that. On the other hand, if someone told me Moonsault Scramble was their favorite hyper, I'd punch them in the face. Metaphorically speaking, of course. /Magnum is not a mine train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TYTL Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 If the coaster has a 100 ft lift, and a 200 foot drop, I still consider it a hyper. I'll even classify Griffon, Moonsault Scramble, and SOB to be hypers as well. Hypers can't be wooden. Not to me at least. SOB is wood, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandluke Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 EDIT: Nevermind, ^you figured it out. I'm lenient with the mega/hyper classification. Steel Eel, Exp. GeForce, Goliath (any of them)...they're all hypers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coasterlvr_nc Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 It would be great if the B & M does something that really pushes the boundaries but I'm not holding my breath. I would be surpised if Carowinds gets a $26 million + coaster, if they do, great. But the parks in the cedar Fair chain that have been attracting that level of investment generally have been the 3 million plus attendance parks like CW, CP, and KI. Carowinds isn't anywhere near that, and is unlikely to have the demographics to come close to that level of attendance but I guess we'll find out in time. You do have to realize that Cincinnati, where KI is, is roughly the same size as Charlotte and the surrounding areas. The only real difference between the two is that Charlotte is growing, one of the few growth markets currently. Also, were growing fast enough that road systems cant keep up, there is always construction going on. But do you realise that it isn't just the city that a park is in that defines it's market but also the size of nearby markets. Carowinds get just over a million visitors whereas KI has been getting almost for 3.5 million visitors for quite a while which speaks volumes about it's proximity to other large markets. Anyway we can speculate all we want, I'm sure they'll announce it in time. Yes, but my point was that our markets are almost the same in size, we just need to tap ours. Oh, I'm sure that they will announce it soon as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousfv Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 2 or 3 years ago I was at a Hotel close to Europapark, where my dad found a paper about Silver Star. A staff member of B&M was quoted for saying that they easily had been able to increase the speed and height by 10 or even 30 percent, but they simply thought the height and speed on Silver Star were just right. I dont't remember if he said, but definitely he expressed fear of exaggeration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netdvn Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 Again, we all know what we mean when we say "hypercoaster." If someone told me their favorite hypercoaster was Steel Eel, I would be totally okay with that. On the other hand, if someone told me Moonsault Scramble was their favorite hyper, I'd punch them in the face. What do you have against Moonsault Scramble? Personally I think that if the coaster is 200-299 ft, it technically is a hyper. Full circuit with nothing but airtime hills or not. Hypers can't be wooden. Not to me at least. SOB is wood, right? Why not? A traditional hypercoaster is essentially a 200+ foot tall "wooden coaster" that uses tubular steel track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TYTL Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 A true wooden roller coaster, not a hybrid, can not be a hyper because the tracks are rectangular and not round. My example of SOB is not a good one because it is a hybrid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electerik Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 I guess my point is that we need the term hypercoaster to describe a particular type of ride: a large steel coaster that mimics the actions of a traditional wooden coaster. Son of Beast is wooden coaster. That it's really big probably doesn't justify describing it in some other, more obtuse way. Calling it a hypercoaster is like, well, calling Steel Force a wooden coaster because it mimics a wooden coasters actions. It's completely misleading. It just seems to me that the logical conclusion of the opposite argument is to categorize all coasters by size, regardless of what they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCFreak Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 A true wooden roller coaster, not a hybrid, can not be a hyper because the tracks are rectangular and not round. My example of SOB is not a good one because it is a hybrid. What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastermoosh Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Maybe he meant "hybrid hyper" ??? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Gaga Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 IMO B&M tends to stick to what it knows and does best and really only does something innovative when it needs too. Like the debut of the floorless coaster was to get the company more recongnition. Now they stick to it for a while and only change when absolutely nessecary. So them going above 300 ft isn't impossible but just not likely IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netdvn Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 I guess my point is that we need the term hypercoaster to describe a particular type of ride: a large steel coaster that mimics the actions of a traditional wooden coaster. So by your definition, coasters like Gemini, Excalibur, the large Pinfari Zyklon/Galaxi coasters, etc... are conisdered hypers because they're large and mimic the actions of a traditional wooden coaster. Son of Beast is wooden coaster. That it's really big probably doesn't justify describing it in some other, more obtuse way. Calling it a hypercoaster is like, well, calling Steel Force a wooden coaster because it mimics a wooden coasters actions. It's completely misleading. No Steel Force is a steel coaster because it uses tubular steel track on a steel structure. Just because it mimics the actions of a wooden coaster doesn't make it a hyper or a wooden coaster. In order for it to be a hyper, it also has to be 200-299 feet (or atleast have a 200-299 foot drop somewhere). And in order to be a wooden coaster, the entire ride has to be 100% wood, or contain wood track on a steel structure. A steel coaster is either 100% steel, or has tubular steel track on a wooden structure. It just seems to me that the logical conclusion of the opposite argument is to categorize all coasters by size, regardless of what they do. I classify all coasters by size as well as whatever their official name given to them by the company, for example, I classify Griffon as a hyper, but it is also a Dive Machine as well, so it is a Dive Machine/Hyper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imhotep Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 ^I can see where you are coming from.. But really, since all dive machines are tall and imposing in general I dont see any reason to call them anything other than Dive Machines. When I think of the word Hyper, I think different things for different manufacturers. With Intamin , I think of an out and back coaster between 200 & 300ft, only because thats how they classify it. With B&M and other manufacturers, I classify it by style of coaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts