Iron Dragon disscussion

Jesz said:
My sister and I have an on going joke that we do our "homework" on Iron Dragon. :) It started back when we were both still in highschool, and would go to Cedar Point on class trips. The point to the joke is that ID is so mellow, that you could do your homework or even take a nap while riding it.

It's too bad that the company that made Iron Dragon is no longer around. They could make it like 20 feet taller, give it a steeper drop and faster turns through the treetops. The second part of the ride could be left alone because it does have a nice finale.

^ i agree. Arrow was and is the best roller coaster company around. They invented the steel coaster and made it the biggest thing. They also made rides with amazing capacity. Arrow is alot better than Intamin.

^Whoa now don't take it to far. :)

My daughter just turned 46'' and I was excited about taking her on Iron Dragon this year. The website now lists this attraction at 48''. Is this correct? If so-- when did it change?

I noticed the same thing. On the Rider Height Requirements page it is listed as 46", but on the actual ride page it is lists as 48". I too have a daughter who will be crossing the 46" mark soon, so I hope it hasn't changed.

I just saw that too, and I'm hoping the ride page is "wrong" with the height requirement, otherwise I'm going to have one bummed out little 6 year old buddy.

One season some kids re able to ride it, next year after they can't. There are going to be even more tantrums this year than in past years.

I didn't even notice that either. I hope they don't raise the min. height. I mean, it's been 46 inch roller coaster ever since I remember. It's the only "big roller coaster" that's 46 inches at the park. Along with the tantrums from the children, parents are going to question the ride host with the height stick, Park Ops, Guest Services, Town Hall like crazy.

Obviously one of the two pages has a typo. I'd probably guess that it will remain at 46" and the ride page is wrong.

Good heavens, I hope so, too! Although my boys are well tall enough now, I'll feel sorry for the families of smaller children because pickings are slim enough. Plus, I think that's going overboard if they would raise it.

It is now 48" in both sections. https://www.cedarpoint.com/plan-a-visit/rider-height-requirements

I cry for the children. This kind of crap drives families away. What happened now? Was there an incident like the one that drove up the height on Mine Ride? Or is it just more over-zealousness?

^There was an accident on Mine Ride? The ride is so tame I always wondered why the 48" Requirement such a mellow ride.

48" is overkill for this ride. There will be a lot of upset parents and disappointed kids.

Glad my two are 49" and 52" now

^^ I think this was the one because I think the following year they raised the height limit.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=799&dat=19840525&id=ipdjAAAAI...93,5194335

I wonder how many families who got season passes this year were banking on Iron Dragon? Maybe we should all raise a ruckus at Cedar Point for being so reckless for putting our children in such perilous danger for the last 26 years.

They have a park rotting that they could make up for families or for those who want easier thrills within driving distance of Cleveland/Akron and Youngstown. Cedar Point may not suffer much for this but they are the only game in town. But this is why we said heck with it and drove further to Pittsburgh when our kids were smaller.

No flying eagle flat or disc-o flat is going to make up for this.

"If" this is the case, there's a reason why I'm glad I don't work in Guest Services.

What a bummer with Iron Dragon. The park really is screwing over those 5-7 year olds who don't want to have to ride all of the kiddy rides. Flight Deck at Kings Island is also 48". Maybe a consistency issue has something to do with the change?

It makes me suspicious that they put in the two new flats at Gemini Midway because they were going to do this to Iron Dragon.

From someone who's seen Cedar Point chip away at universal attractions for kids to ride that weren't baby rides, it's a big blow. Iron Dragon's draw was pretty much small children. My older kid has already started to not bother at times. Gatekeeper's great but also sad for the kids they lost Disaster Transport. How in the heck can Iron Dragon be at the same level as Millennium Force?

I think Flight Deck is taller, faster, and jerkier, Iron Dragon is very gentle.

Totally agree, just because Flight Deck is the same type of coaster as Iron Dragon doesn't mean Iron Dragon has anywhere near the intensity. Must be lawyers at work.

Back in the day, the Mine Ride had no height restriction, just a sign that said "No Handheld Infants Please". It was a great family ride and probably was a first coaster for a lot of the 40 somethings that go to the park today.

(Raises hand) I was one of those kids back in the day.

I'm wondering what is really behind it, is it really insurance, or a change in state law, or Cedar Fair's policy decision? I started to search for other discussions on this action not seeing anything right now but what I did find was a little interesting.

Apparently, Paramount's Kings Island raised the height for Racer and Adventure Express from 42" to 44". Under Cedar Fair, they are now both 48". If I'm not mistaken, I thought a big complaint when they bought Geauga Lake was they raised height limits there, too.

Then also came across an old discussion on this site from a thread about Shoot the Rapids raising the initial height requirement from a projected 42" to the current 52". There was mention of Carowinds Mine Train going from 36" and being raised to 48" after Cedar Fair bought it. There was even talk about how Big Bad Wolf was 42" while Iron Dragon was 46".

Again, were all these rides that dangerous for all these years or is it Cedar Fair going overboard?

Yes, this bothers me. It's what drove us to Pennsylvania when our kids were small.

Was there an incident on Iron Dragon?