chaos Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 Does anyone know what the look out baloons are? I wonder if they are similar to the hot air baloon things at the San Diego Wild Animal Park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCoaster Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 ^ Since the Congo Queen sounds like a Zamperla Rockin Tub, I think the Look Out Balloons will be the Zamperla Samba Tower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry_Gumball Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 But SFMW already has a froghopper...why a second hopper? In that case, let's throw in another boomerang on the other end of the park with a Warner Bros theme or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shepp Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 SFMW is really promising. Holiday in the Park, New kiddies rides, probably one of the best SF parks. Too bad don't make Zonga works, it would be the best SF park Sigh... Yeah, maybe it's one of the best SF parks if you don't really give a damn about coasters. SFMW does well because it attracts lots of families with small kids, and apparently management is playing to its current strengths, thereby pretty much writing off the teenage-and-above market. So while PGA at least sporadically adds decent adult rides, SFMW hasn't done anything in that direction since Zonga (which, IMO, pretty much sucked, anyway) in 2003, and before that, V2, which went up 5 years ago now. SFMW is my home park, and much as I enjoy watching Shouka and the walruses (and I do), it sure would be nice to have more than a grand total of three non-sucky major rides (one of which is often down) in the park. There aren't even more than a couple of OK flats. I mean, how many flippin' times am I expected to ride the damn boomerang? Looks like this sort of thing is the the future direction the new SF management will be taking, anyhow. If it weren't for the prospect of visiting other SF parks with my AP, I think I'd just forget the pass this year, go to PGA for rides, and get my animal jollies at the San Francisco Zoo. Sigh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Menefee Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 But SFMW already has a froghopper...why a second hopper? Because it's not a super kiddie sized frog hopper like the one over in LTSP. Some of you guys should quit thinking so hard and sit back and wait for the park to open in less then a month. Time will tell....... SM- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s2pids2 Posted February 10, 2006 Share Posted February 10, 2006 Looks like this sort of thing is the the future direction the new SF management will be taking, anyhow. If it weren't for the prospect of visiting other SF parks with my AP, I think I'd just forget the pass this year, go to PGA for rides, and get my animal jollies at the San Francisco Zoo. I know how you feel, but at least your lucky enough to live by a park. I used to live 20 minutes from SFGAm...and now I live in Dundee, Scotland. AP's were always a good investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shepp Posted February 10, 2006 Share Posted February 10, 2006 ^ Yes...but... I've preferred SFMW to PGA for MW's blend of animal attractions and rides. Neither place is a great coaster park - you basically have Top Gun vs. Medusa - though SFMW has good wood, and PGA a drop tower and superior flats. But right now, my partner and I can buy PGA passes for $67.50, including free parking for the season, or get SFMW passes for $75 and face a very stiff $15 parking fee per visit (except for weekdays before opening, when passholder parking will probably remain free). I was reamed on another thread for criticizing SF's new management for unexpectedly raising SP prices from "$55 through February" to $75. (They also, I believe, raised gate prices, especially for online purchases.) I did manage to get the previous SP price, and I probably would have paid $75, since I usually spend a couple of days at Waterworld (which I prefer to in-park waterparks like PGA's) and am planning a trip to SFMM in June. (And last year, I used my pass at SFGAdv and SFA - a huge bargain.) But if not for that, I might well have bought a Paramount pass instead, because it would have been a better investment. (e.g., 5 visits to PGA for the two of us: $135. Five to SFMW w. parking: $225.) And I'm wondering if SFMW isn't simply writing off coaster lovers and focusing on families with small children, turning MW into pretty much what it was pre-Six Flags - a non-ride animal park. Leaving Zonga SBNO and not bringing in any of the spare SFAW rides floating around sure suggests that. I'm just curious: does cost figure into most families' park-going decisions, or, even when retail cost of a day at MW has reached Disneyesque levels, do people just shrug their shoulders and pay? Which is to say: At what point does a local park like SFMW price itself too high and start to see diminishing returns? Enjoy your haggis... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCoaster Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 I really do think that Six Flags has figured out that in most cases, families will spend more inside the park than teens. If you are taking your family to a theme park, most people prepare to spend money. Assuming you can find some coupon at (insert grocery store/fast food place here) for admission, its a lot easier to feed the family in park then try to make it someplace off-site for lunch. And how many teens/locals with season passes actually buy anything during a visit. Teens usually don't have enough money to pay the inflated food costs. And as Disneyland has found out, many locals just show up for a couple hours in the morning/evening when the park is less crowded as a kind of social hour. I think marketing towards families is the only way Six Flags is going to dig themselves out of the financial hole Premier Parks made. They will still put in the coasters and big rides, but it will be returning to the every couple of years schedule with smaller updates and improvements during "off" years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satoshi Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Do you know a town Vallejo has height restriction? That means SFMW is in that town, it has strict policies that designer can't definitely build something that's taller than 150 ft. Medusa and Vertical Velocity are not over that height, other buildings are, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 What? I didn't understand anything you just said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memphish Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I....I understand. Maybe you are pointing out that SFMW has a height restriction? You're right it does. That's why V2 had to be modified with a 150ft rear spike and the modified front spike, and also why it was marketed as only 150ft while being the same as V2 at Great America (~180ft). I'm going out on a limb that English is not your primary language. Or you're playing mad libs on message boards. edit: Thanks for adding your location! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarmor Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Height RECONSTRUCTION!!! Wow you learn something new everyday! First I want to say im sorry to the topic starter I wasnt aware of your orgin...and as far as everything else...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbalvey Posted March 13, 2006 Author Share Posted March 13, 2006 ^ Jarmor, Jesus fucking Christ, the guy is from Japan and doesn't have English as his first language. Seriously who the hell are you to point out simple typos in someones post and make fun of them? I figured out what he said perfectly fine. Yes, it might not have been totally clear, but given his location I'm willing to make the effort to figure it out. There are plenty of people here who don't put in any effort at all when they post, but the fact that this guy is from Japan and takes the time to try to post in English and figure things out really says volumes to me. Take that into consideration before you lash out at someone. I'm honestly getting sick of you pointing out minor errors. That's what the mod's job is. Are you a mod? No. So fucking quit it, please. --Robb PS. Your signature hasn't complied by our TOS in a year, and have I nit picked you for that? NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry_Gumball Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I found this out back in like 2002 when V2 had to get neutered. It originally was 186 feet as we all know although SFMW advertised it as 150 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbalvey Posted March 13, 2006 Author Share Posted March 13, 2006 Yes, apparently SFMW wasn't too up front about the actual height of the ride. Either that or they just didn't know. When it was discovered that it was taller than their height restriction allowed, they either had to modify it or remove it. Personally, I would have rather seen it removed and re-located than the current version that is there. Hope that answers your question, and please don't be discouraged by the people who gave you crap about your post. --Robb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PortugePunk Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Personally, I would have rather seen it removed and re-located than the current version that is there. I agree, Robb. The ride that's there now is just slow and boring. Every time I ride it, I feel "what was that all about?" They should have at least added a loop to it or something... at least then it would be more like Tidal Wave (oh excuse me Greezed Lightnin') was at PGA. I'd rather ride it any day... well... when it was still there. Also, having grown up in Vallejo, the height restriction is just stupid. The city says it's because of the nearby Napa Airport, but that is a good 10-20 miles away, I would say. I think they could raise the limit to AT LEAST 200 feet. It's just stupid. I mean there are eucalyptis trees near the park that are probably taller than the 150 foot limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry_Gumball Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Yea...when I first saw the coaster, I thought, "Oh boy, why'd they even bother...they screwed it up majorly..." Depressed in the queue, I was up to ride. Yes, the launch has tamed down a lot now and the back spike seems....stubby. So, I grab the back seat so I can get the highest point and be vertical. Personally, I like the modified 45 degree spiral better than the vertical as everyone goes through it and at times, stall upside down but they could have done something with the straightaway portion other than have it be a straightaway. V2 question: Would the modified V2.5 be counted as a separate credit from the original V2 as it faced significant changes to basically a "New Ride"? I know Zonga was neutered but it's not drastic. If I'm not mistaken, I think PGA has a height limit as well with Sky Tower and DropZone as exceptions due to the San Jose Airport being nearby... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memphish Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 It seems SFMW isn't getting alot of praise from people. I thought the modified front spike would be pretty cool. No Schwartzkof either. Atleast there will be good brews! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrillrider15 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Personally, I would have rather seen it removed and re-located than the current version that is there. But that's what makes the ride unique. I'm pretty sure not everybody wants the ride impulse coasters that are just the same as the rest (excluding Wicked Twister). So I think they made a good choice keeping it there. Although I have not ridden V2 myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkTrips Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I thought the modified front spike would be pretty cool. Me too, a slanted g-roll is something I have envisioned for a while and as far as I know this is the only one like it, so I too would have thought it would be pretty cool. I'll reserve judgement until I ride it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbalvey Posted March 13, 2006 Author Share Posted March 13, 2006 I just found the ride kind of boring. It wasn't nearly as intense as the other impulses, and I didn't think the slanted inversion really did anything for the ride. It just felt like a "fix" more than anything else. Had the ride been originally designed for it, that might have been a different story. --Robb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalrusMan Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 If I'm not mistaken, I think PGA has a height limit as well with Sky Tower and DropZone as exceptions due to the San Jose Airport being nearby... PGA's height limit is different in different areas. The lowest is in the turnaround of Grizzly to Demon area, then from like Drop Zone and diagonally across the park to the Sky Tower (which had to be built shorter than the SFGAm version) is a higher height restriction, and then then over by Top Gun, there is no restriction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebl Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 It's funny that SFMW's height limit is due to proximity to an airport, yet PGA has its Sky Tower and Drop Zone Stunt Tower that are over 200 ft. tall, and it's just a stone's throw from the San Jose Airport. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PortugePunk Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 It's funny that SFMW's height limit is due to proximity to an airport, yet PGA has its Sky Tower and Drop Zone Stunt Tower that are over 200 ft. tall, and it's just a stone's throw from the San Jose Airport. Eric Exactly. Something doesn't make sense. Vallejo does weird stuff. They also turned down BART going through the city years ago... as well as a Trader Joes plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheStig Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Yeah BGT is about 20 miles from Tampa International Airport, but weve got SheiKra whichis 200 feet tall. I see planes flying over BGT all the time, it's right in the pattern for one of TPA's runways. Kinda strange, maybe the airport near SFMW has a lot of privately owened aircraft coming in and out of the airport, as they fly lower than some of the commercial planes. On a side note, being a jerk to other members isnt the best way to make them welcome here. It happened a lot to me over at Westcoaster and I eventuially just left. I was 13 though, and was pretty illitarate (<--Like that for example), but the only nice guy that reminded me about how bad my grammer was EBL, and I THINK he would agree that I'm doing better now! Colin C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now