B&M

It wouldn't have to be a name created by a 9th grader, but it doesn't have to use the name of the local city. I just think they could have been more original about it. They usually come up with a list of possible names when getting a new ride, I find it very hard to believe that this is the best they could do.

Me too, Jugga. I think it (the name) could lead to confusion...especially for tourists.

Whatever, we're getting something new.

MrScott

"I think it (the name) could lead to confusion...especially for tourists."

?????

I don't see any clear reason as to how someone could be confused by the name Grand Rapids. Example please...

Sure, Scooter and Cooter from East Jordon might have a little trouble decipherin whether they should point the pickem up truck to Michigans Adventure or Downtown. But other than that I have run out of ideas...

I see Jugga's point about originality. Still, Nothing will ever be as bad or unoriginal as Nestea Plunge!

bholcomb said:

who really knows at this point... besides Jeff?

Bryan Edwards.

Dont forget DK.;)

Actually, Nestea Plunge was a good piece of marketing. How many parks (or rides for that matter) have you seen sponsored?

Pepsi Max Big One:)

But there are a lot of rides/coasters that are sponsored. Not all the name in the title though.

The name "Grand Rapids" sucks, IMO. What's next? "Cleveland" or "Sandusky" at Cedar Point?

I may not like the name, but am glad we're getting someting new.

MrScott

Good marketing, bad form.

I agree on all counts MrScott. I'm kinda surprised we didn't get the CF staple S&S Space Shot/Turbo Drop tower. But at least this is a start, especially with there being a new train station added (and the train rerouted).

Actually, I think Grand Rapids is a pretty good play on words. I like it, I think it fits well. You wouldn't want to use an scary or intense sounding name for a family ride.

On the other hand, I hated Nestea Plunge. It may have been a good piece of marketing, but I hate ride names tied in with a product advertising. Cheapens the park and makes it tacky. I'm glad that only lasted a few years and that the name went back to Mill Race.

If they are reusing the WWL station, it seems to me like the shape is wrong to hold coaster trains. Individual cars would work, and to me that means water ride.

Look at Dragsters unload... A very tight curve, it might make for a very interesting new way to load.

Also, there's nothing that says the track couldn't just go screaming through the station. It might just be a piece of scenery. I think this would be the best use for it. Have either a tight turn inside, or just a straight through and then right into an immelmann to go back over the sation

It doesn’t necessarily have to load on a curve like WWL did, it would be cool though. Coaster track could go straight through the building. With a little modification, it could go any direction.

If you want a real "Maverick" coaster....try a Floorless racing with a Flyer. Or some other out-of the ordinary combo.

Not that I really think there's room there for a pair of coasters, but this is CP and you never know. They are obviously trying to make as much room as possible.

edit: this would also be in line with Jeff's comment that we'll all be happy.....

*** Edited 3/3/2006 3:39:19 PM UTC by Panman***

Pete said:

If they are reusing the WWL station, it seems to me like the shape is wrong to hold coaster trains. Individual cars would work, and to me that means water ride.

Actually Pete, if they did decide to go with White Water Landings old station, I don't think the trains would curve the way the log boats used to. I think they would probably renovate the station to fit a coasters needs. I think your right though, it has to be a water ride to have left the station up. If you think about it too, there isn't any parks in the midwest that have a water coaster. The only parks I can think of that have water coasters are down at like Universal Islands of Adventure.

Actually, they could do a curving station with a coaster, especially a wooden one. A lot of those old woodies from the golden age had old fashioned curved stations. I don't see why they can't do it again.

also be in line with Jeff's comment that we'll all be happy.....

Jeff also stated that someone had guessed the attraction, at that it was at another board. I'm fairly certain that we've covered the floorless/flyer/water coaster/500-footer territory fairly well. I'm sure we'll all like whatever is coming, but I'm hesitant to think it will be something obvious.

What if they were to add to the station? Like make the WWL structure the unloading station and have an added section of station for loading.

I realize I am late to this particular discussion on "Maverick." But take this as food for thought. B&M design roller coasters and elements from flight. Meaning, they take what stunt pilots and pilots in general do and turn them into coaster elements.

Ever see Top Gun? Maverick...?

Its not so much the literal definition of the word. It is the implied meaning IMPO.

JuggaLotus said:
It wouldn't have to be a name created by a 9th grader, but it doesn't have to use the name of the local city. I just think they could have been more original about it. They usually come up with a list of possible names when getting a new ride, I find it very hard to believe that this is the best they could do.

I heard that the second choice was "Raisin River Flood Zone". I like that much better.

-- Harley