Any word or thought on a ride for 2006???

We weren't/aren't laughing at a 500-footer... rather, we were laughing at BlueStreak5's post.

TTDragster105 said:
By the way, why would you guys be laughing about a 500 foot coaster?

Other than a 500 foot coaster being a very, very dumb decision for CP. A ride of that magnitude would've been started already. TTD was started in August and that was after they got the foundations poured during the offseason of that year. That's why.

I doubt there is going to even be a coaster built this year. Something this year........ But no coaster.

maXair was built this year.

I think Dragster was a bit of a different situation. From what I remember, the ride was mainly complete by the end of December. Maybe I'm getting this mixed up with the completion of the first hill on Millennium Force. Either way, I think a great deal of the work in getting Dragster to open had to do with the launch system. If you think about this in Millennium Force terms, they are not too far off track. Regardless of this, I do agree that a 500 foot coaster does not seem realistic at this point. I have a feeling that something is brewing, though. As long as it's not a lay down coaster, I'll be happy.

It would be nice to see something a bit more traditional, with an emphasis on ride length as opposed to height/speed/inversions and such. I realize that MF is 5th on the list in terms of length, but a lot of that length is due to its height, as it is designed to handle high speeds. If a coaster were built with a similar track length to MF and a height more comparable to Maggie, you'd get an extra 1500' in ride length. Perhaps a hybrid or a floorless with a height in the 170-200' range with a lot of cool elements thrown in with a layout that cruises all around the park (i.e. not like Raptor/Mantis) would create a unique experience while not breaking the bank.

You can rule out a 500 ft coaster for next year. The footers for something that tall would have had to have been poured by now & someone here would have found them. IF there's anything for 2006, it will be "small".

I can't picture a 500 footer unless something is removed. 500 foot out and back? We have Magnum, and riots would erupt if that was removed. 500 foor twister? Millenium would be taken out, riots ensue. 500 foot launch? Take out Dragster, that won't happen. As has been said earlier in this thread, you simply cannot make your ride obsolete. Yes, they did that with Power Tower/Demon Drop, but DD doesn't have the mass apeal that the rides already stated have.

Who says a ride must be removed for a new one? Did they remove Maggie when MF was built?

Whos to say that it has to be a ride for 2006? I personally think that CP should invest their money into making the rides they already have WORK. It was only a week or so ago since all the lights on Millennium were finally fixed. I wish CP would invest in what they have. Does anyone remember the lights, fog and music that used to fill the tunnels on Magnum? Power Towers lights haven't worked right since day 3. Disaster Transports theming is all gone. Now I'm not saying that they need to work on disaster. But Magnum, Millennium, and all other rides throughout the park could be 'updated' or maybe even fixed up. Everyone on my crew was glad to see that they were actually fixing the lights on the lift hill. (Though they did start that about 2 months late) Sometimes its not a thrill ride, or a roller coaster that will bring the people to the park. Its the little things that make the park look nice. Just my two cents.

MF has a completely different ride concept behind it than Maggie does. MF is a height a speed machine and it keeps it all the way through. I remember hearing how CP specifically stated they wanted to steer clear of all the bunny-hops and little elements at the end of the ride and install a beast. (not word for word, of course, but you get the idea. ;) )

Granted new thrills will bring people to the park, but a nice park will keep that coming back. I go for the coasters in the first place and i'm pretty sure just about everyone else here does. But when it comes down to it, a nice fun park is what keeps me in love with the place. Everything from the ride lights, to the smells. The landscaping to the sounds. Its all great and its what makes a park wonderful. Look at how much Six Flags gets ragged on because they are a mess, with a lot of broken rides, and parking lot coasters. WE DONT LIKE THAT! and if Cedar Point were to become something like that, we more than likely wouldnt like it as much or at all. A few small things irk us and they are easy fixes. But its big business and in the end they only look out for themselves with a side order of customer service until its to late. The GP doesnt notice or really care about the lights on the MF, or the seatbelts on corkscrew. Hell most probably shake off the fact that maggie lost its special FX. We are really that only ones that complain about that stuff. Our little moan wont change anything. We just have to live with.

wow, that was intense!

FluffyliketheForce said:
Granted new thrills will bring people to the park, but a nice park will keep that coming back.

I might make a t-shirt that says that, with a picture of Cedar Point above it (maybe change that to them and take granted out). Seriously though, nicely put.

-S. Eagle

*New FluffyliketheForce quote CP-shirts for sale-only $30.

I'll take 2

I personally agree with what SCarolina01 said along with FluffyliketheForce. We need to maintain our current rides. Magnum XL 200 is going to get painted again in the off-season because they didn't finish last off-season. Millennium Force needs a new paint job sooner or later, either this off-season or next because it's turning purple in some areas. Shoot Dragster might be ending early in the season because of Mechanical issues. Who knows what that is this year, but before this break down it only broke down maybe 4 times. And Cedar Point would be foolish to add a 500 foot coaster right now, especially with the econonmy in Ohio and Michigan suffering, and price of gas going up to $3.00 something a gallon. I think Cedar Point isn't going to spend that much money on something like that for another 4 years. Thats my opinion. We need to look at what happend down in New Orleans before we all make our wish list out for a 500 foot coaster. Plus Cedar Point attendance numbers have been up and down this year, so I'm sure this off-season they are going to think of ways to draw people back to the park.

Grovite said:

MF has a completely different ride concept behind it than Maggie does.

I really don't see how you could have formed that opinion. Sure, the rides have some differing elements in them, but to say the ride concepts are 'completely different'? Ummm, no. When Maggie was built, it was a speed machine, too. And as far as what CP said, who cares? Of course they're gonna say that MF will be different, because they are trying to sell you something!

As for the lights and paint and what-not, I agree that they need to keep up on that stuff. Sure, people will probably come to CP even if 1 or 2 lights are out on MF, but having those little things really adds to the park's mojo.

.
*** Edited 9/8/2005 10:54:30 AM UTC by djDaemon***

You're right, but I also believe that all the details of MF just whomp Maggie on another level. Everything about the layout is different, the flow of elements, the elements themselves are providing an entirely different ride experience and it was very well planned out.

Maggie rolls to a stop after nothing but hills. It ends with a lot of small bunny hops and hits the brakes. MF soars over a couple of giant hills and many turns, another turn, a small hill, another turn, a huge turn around and hits the breaks. MF is always changing paths and always doing something new, not bouncing people up and down for the entire last straightaway. Actually, I dont think MF has a real straightaway until the brakes.

Yes, MF does beat Maggie in terms of ride experience (for most people). Thats what 11 years of progress in design & engineering methods can do for a coaster! :)

While Millennium Force and Magnum were both designed to be large and fast, I think they took a bit of a different route when thinking up Millennium Force. They could have easily requested an out and back layout with a bunch of air time, making it pretty much a larger version of Magnum. Instead they decided to use more curves and low sections in the track to play off the speed. I think the thing that makes Millennium Force so cool is the fact that they went for a layout that was unlike any of the hyper coasters getting built at the time. Other than the over-banked curve thing, I haven't seen a whole lot of coasters go up with a layout anything like Millennium Force.

At this point I think they could come out with another air time machine at 500 feet, but instead of having mainly straight hills, like Magnum, they could have more twists and curves. There are a lot of little things that could be done with coasters to give them personality other than making them lay down or stand up. For instance, Holiday World is already adding their third wooden coaster and I don't see anyone suggesting they need to tear down Raven because of it. Why do huge steel coasters have to be any different?