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

Questionable coaster elements


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Reminds me of another company being accused of "stagnating" recently... Seems like history repeats itself *cough* B&M *cough*

 

Uuuh really? Pretty silly if you ask me to include a company that is still coming out with new designs like the wind rider all the time. When B&M goes 15 years without any real innovation besides faster and taller let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone had mentioned CCI and what came to my mind was the "trick track" on Geauga Lake's Villain. You drop off a considerably good sized second hill and right into it at good speed. After a few years that section would be quite rough, and in Gerstlauer trains to boot, that it became the most unpleasant part of the ride, at least for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^B&M did not come out with the first wingrider. Baco at Portadventura opened before B&M's first.

 

B&M has been doing good business, but from an enthusiast perspective, they really have done minimal innovation in the past five years. In that time, we have seen entire companies like Zierer, RMC, and Mack go from being seen as makers of small coasters or subcontractors to becoming some true dominant forces in the industry. Intamin has given us some new stuff as well, though not all of their new designs have been successful. (305, Skyrush).

 

B&M's newest innovations have been a launched wingrider (seven years after Intamin made the first one) and new restraints (of which this type already existed). Also, you could say that their gigas bave been somewhat innovative, but these these are technologically simply taller hypers.

 

In the 90's B&M truly innovated the coaster world, but now they just seem to make the same ride over and over again. While Banshee may have been a good throwback to the old days, but I do not expect any revolutions from this company as the one they created over 20 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poltergeist's final corkscrew. It just feels so out of place.

It's a good ending though!

I'd agree, it just feels out of place. It's also the smoothest part of the ride, which is funny because the corkscrews on Superman were the roughest part of the ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do MCBRs count as "ride elements"?

Yes, but that's getting way off track of the original purpose I started this thread with. Mainly referring to elements that just don't seem fitting with the ride, or those that just have no purpose being there. A Mid-course may not be the best thing to have for the ride experience, but it serves a purpose and it makes sense why it was designed into the ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always found the second twisted hill on Speed Monster out of place. I would have very much enjoyed the double corkscrew the ride originally was designed with!

How'd you know that? Any renderings, 3D simulations?

 

The post-MCBR part of Ispeed is totally pointless. Such a let down comparing to the fast-paced first half! The Italian Loop is also a pacing killer and don't fit the ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always found the second twisted hill on Speed Monster out of place. I would have very much enjoyed the double corkscrew the ride originally was designed with!

How'd you know that? Any renderings, 3D simulations?

 

^The original concept art showed a double corkscrew.

 

Look at the picture at the bottom of this page

http://www.coastersandmore.de/previews/speedmonster/speedmonster.shtml

 

It even says "4 times upside down".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^B&M did not come out with the first wingrider. Baco at Portadventura opened before B&M's first.

 

B&M has been doing good business, but from an enthusiast perspective, they really have done minimal innovation in the past five years. In that time, we have seen entire companies like Zierer, RMC, and Mack go from being seen as makers of small coasters or subcontractors to becoming some true dominant forces in the industry. Intamin has given us some new stuff as well, though not all of their new designs have been successful. (305, Skyrush).

 

B&M's newest innovations have been a launched wingrider (seven years after Intamin made the first one) and new restraints (of which this type already existed). Also, you could say that their gigas bave been somewhat innovative, but these these are technologically simply taller hypers.

 

In the 90's B&M truly innovated the coaster world, but now they just seem to make the same ride over and over again. While Banshee may have been a good throwback to the old days, but I do not expect any revolutions from this company as the one they created over 20 years ago.

Totally agree.

 

IMO they've gone the opposite way of Arrow. Instead of really rough attractions, it's almost like their rides are now "too rideable" in a way.

 

At least they've managed to keep business booming though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree.

 

IMO they've gone the opposite way of Arrow. Instead of really rough attractions, it's almost like their rides are now "too rideable" in a way.

 

At least they've managed to keep business booming though!

 

Yes, I could agree that if there is a fault to B&M's, it's that they are too smooth and too familiar/comfortable. Truth be told, though I'm a major proponent of what they've done, and how superior their engineering is to most other coasters out there, I don't go out of my way for anything but their gigas and their wing riders. Although some coasters stand out from others due to location and scenery/theming, it seems like once you've ridden one B&M of a certain type you've practically ridden them all. Their elements are so perfect that they generally feel the same, so even if one coaster mixes up the order, you can still be assured of what the ride will feel like just looking at it.

 

Oddly enough, I find non-looping coasters to be the hardest to predict what riding will actually feel like, which is why I prefer woodies and hypers. With negative G's, you just never can tell how they are going to show up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Very good point. Some coasters that look like nothing on a POV can actually provide some pretty crazy airtime

 

Also agree that the b&ms can be pretty predictable. The two b&m hypers and one giga up here in Canada are pretty much nearly the same experience. That's probably why I like riding coasters by new/different manufacturers... Sometimes goes really bad, but I've been pleasantly surprised many times as well. Two of the coasters in my top five are proof of that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just going back to the Arrow debate, the reason the track often looks weird is because Toomer always took one rail, and wrapped the other around it. In most "weird" sections on Arrows, one rail is fairly smooth, and the other can get really gimpy.

 

Another factor for weird Arrow moments is that Toomer felt that getting "beat up and bashed around" was something a lot of thrill seekers wanted. Some of those awkward moments were intentionally put in to add to the thrill. Obviously they bet on the wrong horse, though a lot of people seem to think some modern coasters are TOO smoother now, and B&M certainly gets a lot of criticism in that area.

 

Also, many Arrow transitions wouldn't feel too awful if they had better trains, but one thing that was REALLLY dated on Arrows by the end was their bogie system. The bogie had a fixed axel per car, so to prevent problems with the wheels chaffing, they left a gap between the guide and upstop wheels.

 

True, a lot of the transitions would hurt anyhow, but you also need to factor in the extra slam you get when the guide wheels slip over to the rail. Here's a picture of LNM.

 

 

Also, Arrow did use computers in the end, but not as well as they could have, plus their bogie system was the same as it had been for 40 years. Here's a video showing Drachen Fire in CAD.

 

 

Anyhow, getting back onto the thread, my nomination is that weird straight section at the bottom of the Verboten drop. Every other spot of the ride flows nicely, but because they were following the wolf footers, there's this one odd straight and level part between two S curves at the bottom of the Rhine river drop... (my other answer was the Anaconda helixes, but it was taken)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just going back to the Arrow debate, the reason the track often looks weird is because Toomer always took one rail, and wrapped the other around it. In most "weird" sections on Arrows, one rail is fairly smooth, and the other can get really gimpy.

 

 

Wow, what an informative post. The one think I don't get is what you mean by taking one rail and wrapping the other, though I can conjecture that he must have built one rail and then the other was built off that?

 

Aside from the track tracking issues, which you very well explained, the trains themselves just weren't/aren't comfortable for riders. It was very claustrophobic, though to some that's comforting, and the position it put your body and legs didn't merit itself to being able to navigate twists and turns in an enjoyable fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^When I was saying b&m is "too smooth", it's not really that I have a problem with how shaky, or lack there of the ride is. It's simply that the actual forces aren't as strong on modern b&ms.

 

Speaking of b&m, another weird moment I found was on Goliath at La Ronde. Right before the final breaks, the ride does sort of cool mini double down. It's weird, but in a good way

 

This POV from TPR's channel shows what I mean:

(Skip to 1:40)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, what an informative post. The one think I don't get is what you mean by taking one rail and wrapping the other, though I can conjecture that he must have built one rail and then the other was built off that?

 

There's an axle that the track twists around like heartline and center of two rails. Arrow use one of the two rails as the axle. But the rail used as the axle goes slightly inwards to compensate with the track moving upwards/downwards.

 

In this photo of Vortex, the axle is the left rail.image.jpg.ba41bbea3b95519adf7aa357cd4897ea.jpg

 

Moving inwards is a bit more obvious in this photo:

image.jpg.cd70f45b227acbce55eec6827e3e9bf4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh how I love the "random rollercoaster" function of RCDB! Have we seen this one?

 

 

There is not enough money in the world to get me on... whatever that thing is.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh how I love the "random rollercoaster" function of RCDB! Have we seen this one?

 

Where is that abomination?

It is in Mexico. Sadly it's not running as of earlier this year, I'd totally ride it.

 

Sorry a bit OT but I just have to leave this one here....

questionable.png.550809c11d5a77cc5846128b3057829f.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^When I was saying b&m is "too smooth", it's not really that I have a problem with how shaky, or lack there of the ride is. It's simply that the actual forces aren't as strong on modern b&ms.

 

That's actually what I was getting at! Prior to the early 90s, part of a roller coaster was getting jostled around. In the 90s there was this golden era where many companies, with B&M at the helm, figured out how to make a mostly-smooth coaster, but with very strong forces on them that really felt intense. I'd say BTR, Alpengeist, Raptor, Medusa, etc. are very good examples of these rides.

 

But I think they've gone too far lately. They're SO good at making their rides glass-smooth, that they now try to reduce any discomfort they can in other areas, which seems to be in the g-force department. You just don't get BTR style vertical loops or raptor style ending helix's on rides anymore :/

 

Maverick is a good exception to this rule, but a lot of people like to complain about it too for some reason.

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/