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

Kings Dominion (KD) Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

I would rather have a totally new coaster unless... they somehow connect Hurler with Grizzly and RMC both...

 

Grizzly is fine. It just needs a real entrance.

 

Here's a question I have: Would you rather have an RMC'd Hurler or a totally new coaster in its spot?

Totally new, no question. I don't even care what the ride is, Hurler's layout doesn't lend itself to a conversion at all.

 

Time after time enthusiasts declare with great authority that a layout doesn't lend itself to an RMC conversion (does Colossus ring a bell? What about Twisted Twins?) and time after time they're wrong. I'll take the RMC conversion. I see what you're saying but at this point I'm convinced that RMC can make anything amazing.

Edited by coasterbill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a question I have: Would you rather have an RMC'd Hurler or a totally new coaster in its spot?

Totally new, no question. I don't even care what the ride is, Hurler's layout doesn't lend itself to a conversion at all.

 

Time after time enthusiasts declare with great authority that a layout doesn't lend itself to an RMC conversion (does Colossus ring a bell? What about Twisted Twins?) and time after time they're wrong. I'll take the RMC conversion.

Twisted Twins had an actual layout. Twisted Colossus' layout is the most uninspired thing I've seen RMC put out (well, tied with Goliath) so I don't really see that as evidence that Colossus lent itself well to a conversion - the saving grace of that ride is that it duels (sometimes), which clearly Hurler doesn't and won't be doing.

 

Hurler is five airtime hills and three completely flat turns. Short of building entirely new structures, it will remain that way but with some funky banking and a barrel roll or two. And if you're going to have to make every hill and turn taller anyway, why bother? Colossus had its height going for it, at least. Hurler barely leaves what, 30 feet off the ground after the first turn?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twisted Colossus' layout is the most uninspired thing I've seen RMC put out (well, tied with Goliath)

 

You have to admit that even if that is what ends up happening, an "uninspired" RMC like Goliath or Twisted Colossus even if it's slightly smaller would probably be either the second or third best coaster in the park depending on who you talk to after I305 and maybe Volcano.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a question I have: Would you rather have an RMC'd Hurler or a totally new coaster in its spot?

Totally new, no question. I don't even care what the ride is, Hurler's layout doesn't lend itself to a conversion at all.

 

Time after time enthusiasts declare with great authority that a layout doesn't lend itself to an RMC conversion (does Colossus ring a bell? What about Twisted Twins?) and time after time they're wrong. I'll take the RMC conversion.

Twisted Twins had an actual layout. Twisted Colossus' layout is the most uninspired thing I've seen RMC put out (well, tied with Goliath) so I don't really see that as evidence that Colossus lent itself well to a conversion - the saving grace of that ride is that it duels (sometimes), which clearly Hurler doesn't and won't be doing.

 

Hurler is five airtime hills and three completely flat turns. Short of building entirely new structures, it will remain that way but with some funky banking and a barrel roll or two. And if you're going to have to make every hill and turn taller anyway, why bother? Colossus had its height going for it, at least. Hurler barely leaves what, 30 feet off the ground after the first turn?

 

Is something preventing RMC from building more to the structure of Hurler while doing their thing to it at the same time? Iron Rattler doesn't do any funky barrel rolling through a 900 degree helix because the helix went the way of my happiness at Lakemont Park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing preventing that at all! My point was just that if you're going to have to build half of your new ride's structure anyway, why restrict yourself to a flat oval layout in the first place? Not that it's RMC's choice, of course, but you've gotta admit - you could get a way cooler RMC if you bulldozed Hurler and started fresh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a question I have: Would you rather have an RMC'd Hurler or a totally new coaster in its spot?

 

Please no snarky/sarcastic responses. Just give a sincere answer.

 

new coaster. Hurler's layout is lame and boring and RMC can't fix that.

 

i mean .. in order to make Hurler awesome, you'd have to do so much that you might as well start from scratch in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh sure, that I'll give you. But if I get the choice (as posed) between an Hurler-sized Goliath or a brand new ride, I'd almost definitely choose the new ride. Especially if that ride is an RMC. Especially especially if we can get that giant moonshine stand from the CP thread.

 

Agreed but based on what they've done recently the replacement would likely be something like a GCI or B&M. Could they go outside the box and get a custom RMC or a Blitz coaster like Maverick? Of course. But I'd rather take the middle of the road RMC that would be amazing rather than an empty plot of land and a gamble as to what Cedar Fair would do with it given the direction they've been headed lately (with Fury being the exception but the park already has a giga).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is this "Why would you want to have a layout near the ground, that's bad" nonsense? A) Hurler didn't suck until they deferred maintenance on it over and over and over. B) Did we learn nothing from Maverick? Did we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is this "Why would you want to have a layout near the ground, that's bad" nonsense? A) Hurler didn't suck until they deferred maintenance on it over and over and over. B) Did we learn nothing from Maverick? Did we?

 

Hurler was always lame and uninspired. it just wasn't as unbearably rough until the maintenence got out of hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hurler's layout is lame and boring and RMC can't fix that.

 

Once again...

 

RMC has proven enthusiasts wrong time and time again with this same complaint. Do you people ever learn?

 

i simply disagree with your opinion that RMC can make Hurler into a great ride. that is no reason to get all "you people" obnoxious about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is this "Why would you want to have a layout near the ground, that's bad" nonsense? A) Hurler didn't suck until they deferred maintenance on it over and over and over. B) Did we learn nothing from Maverick? Did we?

You're seriously kidding me if you're comparing Maverick to Hurler's layout.

 

i simply disagree with your opinion that RMC can make Hurler into a great ride. that is no reason to get all "you people" obnoxious about it.

Exactly. People bitch about the Kings Dominion thread like no other, but the people bitching are hardly helping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i simply disagree with your opinion that RMC can make Hurler into a great ride. that is no reason to get all "you people" obnoxious about it.

 

Sure there is. Time and time again people boldly claim that RMC can't make (insert coaster here) into a great ride. So far they've been wrong 100% of the time. I see where coasterfreak101 is coming from by saying that he'd rather roll the dice on a new ride (even though we disagree) but even he's not claiming that whatever RMC came up with wouldn't be great (even if it's not great compared to other RMC's it would still be great).

 

So yes, when so many people have made the same claim with great authority over and over again and been wrong every single time then it's totally understandable to lose patience with such a ridiculous complaint with no reasoning behind it.

 

What is this "Why would you want to have a layout near the ground, that's bad" nonsense? A) Hurler didn't suck until they deferred maintenance on it over and over and over. B) Did we learn nothing from Maverick? Did we?

You're seriously kidding me if you're comparing Maverick to Hurler's layout.

 

I believe he's referring to what RMC could do with Hurler and not Hurler in it's current form. He brings up an excellent point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with Hurler is that yes, while it is low to the ground like Maverick and even I305 in the same park, it doesn't do anything that you'd want a ride to do low to the ground. The turns are so rough and cause so much unnecessary friction that along with the trim what should be really good airtime isn't really worth mentioning when considering the ride as a whole.

 

I'm sure that RMC could fix part of that issue with better engineered turns (an overbank instead of the first flat turn would definitely help) and going 45mph doing crazy ejector hills, outside banking and rolls with snappy transitions is much better than going 30mph trying to crawl through the last set of mild "floater" hills before slowly approaching the brakes.

 

All said and done I think RMC would change Hurler's layout quite a bit more than most RMCs end up changing in terms of profile and height, so I think they could easily make a #2 in the park for me at the very least and I'd take that over a new B&M unless it were an invert but that's probably not happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i simply disagree with your opinion that RMC can make Hurler into a great ride. that is no reason to get all "you people" obnoxious about it.

 

Sure there is. Time and time again people boldly claim that RMC can't make (insert coaster here) into a great ride. So far they've been wrong 100% of the time. I see where coasterfreak101 is coming from by saying that he'd rather roll the dice on a new ride (even though we disagree) but even he's not claiming that whatever RMC came up with wouldn't be great (even if it's not great compared to other RMC's it would still be great).

 

So yes, when so many people have made the same claim with great authority over and over again and been wrong every single time then it's totally understandable to lose patience with such a ridiculous complaint with no reasoning behind it.

 

What is this "Why would you want to have a layout near the ground, that's bad" nonsense? A) Hurler didn't suck until they deferred maintenance on it over and over and over. B) Did we learn nothing from Maverick? Did we?

You're seriously kidding me if you're comparing Maverick to Hurler's layout.

 

I believe he's referring to what RMC could do with Hurler and not Hurler in it's current form. He brings up an excellent point.

 

sorry bud, i still disagree with your opinion, and i still think that's not a reason for you to be a dick about it.

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/