What is a better formula for a coaster?

[gforce1994]

If one was building a coaster would more people ride it if it had either a). some ejecetor air with some intense 4G loops, or b). loads of ejector airtime.

[alpengeistfan1]

I believe there are two different questions here.

 

Would more people ride it? More loops.

 

Would it be better? Ejector airtime.

 

Just my personal opinion.

[154bmag]

^Exactly,

The GP usually thinks the loops are cooler, but loops alone don't make a good ride.

[3Mutts]

For the normal person (GP) it would be TONS of Inversions (7 or more) or something that is first of its kind or a record breaker (X2 and Kingda Ka). For a Coaster Enthusiast it would be EXTREME ejector airtime (Skyrush or Megalite) or EXTREME Positive Gs on looping coasters (Katun or Kumba) or even a mixture (Maverick).

[_koppen]

Let's not forget that putting inversions on a ride also makes a fair amount of people not wanna ride it.

[netdvn]

I'm in the minority here. I'd love to see a coaster with a perfect amount of intense g-inducing inversions/turns and some good pops of airtime here and there. Toss in a good layout and you have a perfect ride.

 

The public loves whatever's marketable. Unique elements and gimmicks almost always win out against coasters with lots of loops and loads of airtime, unless of course, you crank up the intensity on either. Of course with inversions, you alienate a group of people as well. Same goes for height and speed.Then again, you can't please everyone.

[cal1br3tto]

Well, looking at the thread title and subtitle, I would've gone for a pure airtime machine. But if both the airtime and the positive forces are strong, that could make for one of the better coasters the world has seen.

[gforce1994]

I meant wheather airtime mixed in with loops was better or worse than just having loops.

[bill_s]

There's always limits on track length so you can never have lots of everything. Therefore, some specialization. But definitely, curves and bits of airtime can make a big difference in looping coasters, and there is room for improvement.

 

Maverick would be an example of a more mixed combination, but it took a more mature industry and public to appreciate that great specs in one area such as inversions is not what makes a great coaster.

 

I would like to see and ride more coasters that really mix it up, not just to do it but in an effective arrangement. For example, by having an inversion near the beginning and end, they would be more different in speed, you don't need a bunch in between. You don't need an airtime hill right after a good drop.

[rctneil]

A good coaster it not necessarily anything with inversions or ejector air or whatever other elements. It's one that makes good use of it. A good coaster also shouldn;t cram too many types of element into a ride. Some of the better coasters I have ridden just keep things simple.

 

Take for example, Big Grizzly Mountain Runaway Mine Cars (Phew!), that ride is not tall, fast, has no inversions, etc, but delivers and amazing family ride experience.

 

Intamin Mega-Lites are aimed at the thrill market but don't have inversions and those are amazing rides to.

 

I think some peoples thoughts that coasters with inversions are for the thrill people and ones without are not, are plain wrong.

[bill_s]

I think it's fairly well known by now that coasters without inversions can be thrilling. In fact I think a good hyper has more draw now than a good mid-sized looper.

 

Also, my favorite inversions ARE a form of airtime.

 

"A good coaster also shouldn;t cram too many types of element into a ride." -- strongly disagree. Well actually, if the result felt "crammed" in, yeah that wouldn't work... even in rides that are mostly inversions, curves, or hills, their interest, pacing and flow comes from variations in the elements and often some mixing. The same aspects of design would apply to making a ride work with a more of a variety of elements. Obviously this would give more variety within a single coaster, but also more opportunity for a great design or a poor one. I wrote "curves and bits of airtime can make a big difference in looping coasters" -- this is just easiest to explain. Plus, as soon as you put any inversion in, that applies.

[Movieguy]

Anything with a ton of airtime is good by me. Multi-inversion coasters are only good if they don't have OTSR's, most of the time. I understand the need for them on inverts and the like, but sit-down loopers don't really need them, as Premier has proven over and over.

[Voxelmatic]

The best type of ride for me would be a coaster with ejector airtime, high-g's, and no OTSRs. So in a word, Skyrush

[GayCoasterGuy]

^Or Mind Bender at SFOG. A bit milder, I know. But it also has high ride-ability and you actually *move around* in the seat and leave the seat. Front and back are vastly different as well...

[Voxelmatic]

^I should mention that I love Mind Bender almost as much as Skyrush.

[bill_s]

Anything with a ton of airtime is good by me. Multi-inversion coasters are only good if they don't have OTSR's, most of the time. I understand the need for them on inverts and the like, but sit-down loopers don't really need them, as Premier has proven over and over.

 

The Flight of Fear design has zero airtime and hangtime except maybe the final corkscrew (more so with hands up, try it!). I haven't ridden any other Premiers with lapbars but the point is that lapbars being OK for some isn't the same as all. And I would rather have a ride more extreme sometimes, even if it means OTSRs. They vary greatly. I mentioned Drachen Fire's, which were basically hard steel aimed at your jawbone, unsafe at any speed.

[Anything]

A long lift for suspense and a huge steep drop for fear. If the extent of the drop is obscured, even better. Oblivion and Jubilee Odyssey remain the most intimidating rides in the UK for this reason.

[thrillseeker4552]

I like loops, but not too many. Maybe between 4 and 7. I like airtime (obviously) but not INSANE airtime because the restraints always have to be extra tight. Maybe around -0.6 Gs to -1 Gs. The reason I liked loops in the layout is because it, in my opinion, keeps the layout fun; rather than hill, turn, hill, hill, turn, helix, etc. That's why I like Maverick so much.

[simaticable]

Honestly, a great coaster to me would be like Outlaw Run, plenty of forces while having loads of airtime in places that you wouldn't expect them to be. That way everyone is happy, and another awesome ride is built.

[Randomman295]

Everybody seems to forget how important pacing is for a ride. Spacing out elements and separating intense inversions with low-g and negative-g sections is important, and it's what makes rides like Voyage, Intimidator 305, Millennium Force and Maverick such great rides.

[gerstlaueringvar]

Lap Bar is the NO.1 important factor.

 

Creative layout and new elements.

 

Cool looking trains.

 

Good station design.

 

Capacity that matches the need of the park.

 

Airtime.

[Dr. M]

I would normally say a combination of loops and airtime, but come to think of it, to me the "twisted horseshoe roll" on Maverick is just wasted track. I get nothing out of it at all. Replace it with two more airtime hills and the ride would be improved tremendously. So I guess that's my answer. I only really like inversions on rides like inverts and floorless coasters.

 

But if I were to make a more general statement about what makes coasters good, I'd say it really comes down to a sense of speed. That sense of speed comes from the speed itself, the surrounding environment, and the size of the various elements and how quickly you're taking them. If you've got that sense of speed, to me that's all it takes to make a good ride.

[Loefet]

The answer would be a bit of both I presume, then it would please most people.

 

So Helix would be the obvious choice