simaticable Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 It may be the original B&M invert, but it's no longer original to the park. You can get the same experience at another Six Flags park or any other park that has that model. It's the first of the clones, but still a clone due to the fact that it is not unique anymore.
HARLEYGUYJB Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 Just because its the first one doesnt mean its not a clone. If there are others like it, its a clone. And if Im not mistaken, Chicago has 7 clones. How does Great America/Chicago have 7 clones? Batman: The Ride is not a clone since it is the very first inverted B&M and every other park has a clone of Great America's Batman. It is also different because Great America has 13 roller coasters. If 2 or more parks have the same roller coaster regardless if its the orginal..or not..its still a clone in my book...
Rollercoaster Rider Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 No, I haven't been to the park since 2010 but even then the park overall looked pretty good to me. It just has a few spots that need an influx of new attractions, the biggest one being where they eventually added Tsunami Soaker. Out of curiosity but isn't SFStL the smallest of the Six Flags parks in terms of actual developed acreage and not total acreage of the entire site? According to the Six Flags 2013 Annual Report, Many Parks are smaller than SFStL (283 Acres) SFAm- 215 Acres SFDK- 135 Acres SFM- 110 Acres SFOT- 217 Acres LR- 146 Acres And if anyone wants the entire list • Six Flags America, Largo, Maryland—515 acres (owned) • Six Flags Discovery Kingdom, Vallejo, California—135 acres (owned) • Six Flags Fiesta Texas, San Antonio, Texas—216 acres (owned) • Six Flags Great Adventure & Wild Safari and Hurricane Harbor, Jackson, New Jersey—2,200 acres (owned) • Six Flags Great America, Gurnee, Illinois—304 acres (owned) • Six Flags Hurricane Harbor, Arlington, Texas—47 acres (owned) • Six Flags Hurricane Harbor, Valencia, California—12 acres (owned) • Six Flags Magic Mountain, Valencia, California—250 acres (owned) • Six Flags Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico—110 acres (occupied pursuant to concession agreement) • Six Flags New England, Agawam, Massachusetts—262 acres (substantially all owned) • Six Flags Over Georgia, Austell, Georgia—283 acres (leasehold interest) • Six Flags Over Texas, Arlington, Texas—217 acres (leasehold interest) • Six Flags St. Louis, Eureka, Missouri—503 acres (owned) • Six Flags White Water Atlanta, Marietta, Georgia—69 acres (owned) • La Ronde, Montreal, Canada—146 acres (leasehold interest) • The Great Escape, Queensbury, New York—345 acres (owned)
SteveStL Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 Much of SFSTL acreage is on a hill which makes it hard to develop. Surprised that haven't sold some of it off honestly
RCF Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 Much of SFSTL acreage is on a hill which makes it hard to develop. Surprised that haven't sold some of it off honestly If they have a hill they can easily develop amazing terrain coasters and flats that go "over the edge extreme" for marketing purposes. They can easily develop onto that hill once Six Flags is willing to do it.
parkjunkie Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 I think we have every right to complain. We're not complaining about wanting a $40 million coaster or anything like that, we're just wanting general maintenance dome to the park. The park has over 200+ undeveloped acres. The area out by 5th street and all the grassy area by the I-44 they put up for sale back during the recession, but no one was interested. They then thought about putting the 200 acres on the hill for sale, but they decided against that. Development on the hill will NEVER happen. The only thing I could see is a terrain coaster, but that is such a long shot. For those who dont know where we are talking about, it is directly east of the theme park. SFSTL unused land
Sf-Dad Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 What are the reasons the hill will never be developed? One I can think of is the other side of the hill is Greensfelder Park. There could be restrictions on how close SF can develop to it.
parkjunkie Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 Everything inside the red outline is Six Flags, Greensfelder has nothing to do with it. The reason youll never see it happen is cost. To run new sewers, new water lines, new utilities and new data lines would be in the 10s of millions, and thats before the cost of rides, buildings, pathways and landscaping.
SFZIP Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 Most of the land east of the park (past the parks dump area), is quietly for sale, but there is probably not a whole lot of interest in the land, Eureka is not exactly a booming town right now, there are a lot of out of business restaurants and shops along the strip to the east of the park. One thing that I think makes the park look bad right off the bat is the cheap looking (by today's standards) 1970's marble concrete that makes up all the ticket area, front mall and in front of the palace. Almost every theme park in the country (big or small) has a brick or some other fancy concrete design that gives the park a better initial image. I know that a few years ago the park redid a few small sections of the outer front mall with a newer design, but of course nothing has been done ever since and it looks bad and really outdated (if you're going to start something, you have to finish it and not leave it half done, which is something that Six Flags does all the time).
Grant45 Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 I just got back from my visit to SFGaM and the Goliath was one of the best coasters I have ever ridden. That being said I would really like to see RMC get their hands on the boss. The crowds on the Goliath were crazy, and people were trying to figure out how they did it. If boss got some RMC love I do believe (if they market it right) crowds would just pour in the park.
parkjunkie Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 Any GOOD one of a kind big coaster would beyond help this park. SFSTL is a very well liked park and is smack dead in the middle of the country, so many people come here. If SFSTL were to ever get a good Intamin, B&M, RMC or anything big like that, a ton more would visit and the park would finally rally be on the map. I cant really think of a park besides SFSTL other than SFFT or Knotts that doesnt have a mega coaster or bigger.
prozach626 Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 Any GOOD one of a kind big coaster would beyond help this park. SFSTL is a very well liked park and is smack dead in the middle of the country, so many people come here. If SFSTL were to ever get a good Intamin, B&M, RMC or anything big like that, a ton more would visit and the park would finally rally be on the map. I cant really think of a park besides SFSTL other than SFFT or Knotts that doesnt have a mega coaster or bigger. SFFT has Iron Rattler.
parkjunkie Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 Any GOOD one of a kind big coaster would beyond help this park. SFSTL is a very well liked park and is smack dead in the middle of the country, so many people come here. If SFSTL were to ever get a good Intamin, B&M, RMC or anything big like that, a ton more would visit and the park would finally rally be on the map. I cant really think of a park besides SFSTL other than SFFT or Knotts that doesnt have a mega coaster or bigger. SFFT has Iron Rattler. Im mean a 200+ foot steel mega
Rollercoaster Rider Posted June 28, 2014 Posted June 28, 2014 Any GOOD one of a kind big coaster would beyond help this park. SFSTL is a very well liked park and is smack dead in the middle of the country, so many people come here. If SFSTL were to ever get a good Intamin, B&M, RMC or anything big like that, a ton more would visit and the park would finally rally be on the map. I cant really think of a park besides SFSTL other than SFFT or Knotts that doesnt have a mega coaster or bigger. SFFT has Iron Rattler. Im mean a 200+ foot steel mega And Iron Rattler is 179ft with a 171ft drop. What's your point? http://rcdb.com/11663.htm
Arrow Dynamics fan Posted June 29, 2014 Posted June 29, 2014 (edited) ^With all due respect, 179 is less than 200 ft which means it is not a "mega" coaster. Okay, so I had the pleasure of having lunch with Dave again this week. I think that it's easy to get pessimistic about the park, but I left with a lot of hope. Dave and his team have an incredible plan for the park in terms of just improving what is there. Well, here's some points:-They are going to continue to remove as many dead areas as possible, like the Hannibarrels this year. -They want to use a lot of small improvements to lighten up the park, and breathe new life into it. -They see this period as a conversion from an "old park" to a "new park." The park has held two million without HH, so they want to keep perfecting what is there rather than crazily expanding. While many are critical of the "warf" area, I think your opinion will change within the next couple years. The ideas and options for developing and reimagining that area are all great. That entire area of the park should be more refreshed in the next couple of years. As St. Louis' economy has been one of the slowest to recover from the 2008 financial mess, the park will build itself back up. By the way, if anyone has an extra $2million we can blow up the admissions area and build it back up. Just message me if you're interested. Not what I was hoping for but I understand the reasoning and believe this might be the right direction...for now... From what I hear from the GP, many people consider the park to be "old" even though many of the parks they go to instead are just as old and some have less new attractions. I think that IF they fix up the appearance of the park for a couple years and then follow this up with a major ground breaking attraction, this might be what the park needs to rebuild its reputation. Having top notch attractions is very important to success, but it isn't the only thing. Case and point is SFMM. They have one of my favorite lineup of coasters (second to CP), but my overall opinion of that park is negative. As far as I am concerned, they might as well retheme the whole thing after E. St. Louis or Detroit based on all the empty queue house, the dead plants, run down looking rides and queue houses, and the behavior of some the patrons as well as the some of the staff matched it accordingly. In my opinion, this is why it struggles to get 3 million visitors a year despite the enormous rollercoaster budget it has had. I would much rather have this than SF corporate deciding that the way to combat the Lightning Run and whatever HW gets is to move the something like the Muskrat Scrambler to St. Louis and title it the "Rusty Rat: Lockjaw Twist." If the park can become more appealing from an appearance stand point, this would be helpful. I hope whatever we get next that it is NOT the Iron Boss. While I like Outlaw Run and believe I will enjoy Goliath, NTAG did not impress me. I again stress that it does not make sense to transform the coaster that generally has the longest line into something different. It would be more effective to take a coaster that is older and not performing as well and transform it into something better. As much as I like it the way it is, why not a Chance mega lite transformation of the Ninja? Edited June 29, 2014 by Arrow Dynamics fan
parkjunkie Posted June 29, 2014 Posted June 29, 2014 (edited) ^With all due respect, 179 is less than 200 ft which means it is not a "mega" coaster. Thank you, someone DOES know what mega coaster means Hell, I'd even be happy with taking out Tidal Wave a squeezing in a Gerst. Euro Fighter Edited June 29, 2014 by parkjunkie
Arrow Dynamics fan Posted June 29, 2014 Posted June 29, 2014 I don't see Iron Boss happening for a while. They just sunk a lot of money into rehabbing the purple train including painting the chassis. I can see some topper track possibly being tossed it's way soon but that is about all I see happing anytime soon. Did they work on the chassis beyond painting it? As much as I would love for those trains to be scrapped, this is a step in the right direction as the Purple one has always given the worst ride. Topper track in my opinion is the way to go on this one.
Arrow Dynamics fan Posted June 29, 2014 Posted June 29, 2014 I don't see Iron Boss happening for a while. They just sunk a lot of money into rehabbing the purple train including painting the chassis. I can see some topper track possibly being tossed it's way soon but that is about all I see happing anytime soon. Did they work on the chassis beyond painting it? As much as I would love for those trains to be scrapped, this is a step in the right direction as the Purple one has always given the worst ride. Topper track in my opinion is the way to go on this one. Purple got new bearings on all wheels (guide, road, and upstop) and new bushings. Because of this the purple train has to be full when it's used ( all the bearings are tight and slow the train down) and purple is used as the third train. Currently green is the only train that requires no weight in it. So on a day when the line is constantly changing, the yellow will go around with people and green goes empty that way they don't have to deal with lead bags to go up it down a train Interesting! I have generally found the yellow to have the best ride. Thanks for sharing the info.
Sf-Dad Posted June 29, 2014 Posted June 29, 2014 Can someone make a "how to ride The Boss guide". What train is the best and where to sit. My son only sits in the middle because he is scared of the front and back. If one of you experts gave some recommendations he might step out of his comfort zone. We got rained out Friday afternoon but had a good afternoon today at HH. Noticed they raised preferred parking to $30 for $25. I think they pushed it to high, I have seen that lot fuller on a weekday. Thanks.
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