Is Cedar Fair done with intamin?

Intamin built rides to the specifications of what the parks wanted, it was not Intamin's choice to break records. They bid on the project and won the bid, most likely because of cost.

If you buy a certain brand of automobile that causes you nothing but problems, how many more cars of that brand are you going to buy before you buy something that works better?

And yes, look at Gatekeeper. A reliable, fun, high capacity ride that was completed on time and gave over 2 million rides in it's first season. Compare that to Intamin products and I think you answered your question on if CF could possibly be done with Intamin.

Chelsie Paige said:
Intamin although they have their fair share of problems with the relibability of their rides doesn't make their rides bad.

That seems like the definition of bad. If the rides are expensive to operate and downtime reduces their capacity, it's bad for the park's reputation, and the cost per ride is high.

Furthermore, Intamin doesn't break records, they build what their customers ask for, and get that business by bidding the lowest. I think Cedar Fair understands that you get what you pay for, which is why we now have rides like Behemoth, Banshee and the forthcoming ride at Carowinds.

My favorite rides are Intamin's (MF, Maverick, TTD). I don't think the downtime and reliability on them are too bad, maybe I'm just there on good days. But if B&M built Maverick, the capacity might be better.

Intamin has stated that there is an acceptable percentage of failures. That is enough of an issue with me regarding the company.

When it comes to engineering, there are always acceptable failure rates.

Thabto said:
I don't think the downtime and reliability on them are too bad...

That's likely because you're not the one paying for them. :)

In a way I am paying for them, I'm sure some of the money the park makes from me buying a platinum pass goes to maintaining those rides.

You're completely missing the point.

It's well-documented that Intamin's rides have had enormous issues, not just at CP, but everywhere.

I've only seen MF down briefly once this year and it was back up and running a few minutes later. TTD is probably the Intamin ride with the most down time, but last time I was there it was down for a while due to wind. I think WT blew a circuit on more than one occasion. STR is another ride with major issues, but it's not something I ride because I don't really like rides where I get soaked. Yes, Intamin rides are less reliable than B&M and Arrow, but they are still good rides. Intamin is just like the Wal-Mart of rides. But then we could also use the argument of why Skyhawk was down about 80% of last season, and that's not an Intamin ride.

Thabto said:
Yes, Intamin rides are less reliable than B&M and Arrow, but they are still good rides.

Again, "good" is likely not the term you'd use if you were responsible for paying for their installation and maintenance.

As for your visits funding their upkeep - your contribution rounds down to approximately $0.00.

Millenium Firce may have had issues its first year but whatever they were sure seem to have been resolved. Of course I am not at CP every day but I cannot recall more than once or twice MF being down.

Even TTD that people claim breaks all the time seems pretty reliable to me. Other than weather related issues TTD has been down just a few times that I have noticed. one is definitely Intamins fault... Someone decided to get a cell phone out just before launch and the ops crew caught it. They had to bring the trains back and had a crew member go take the camera from the guy... I have seen some issues where it may be down but usually less than 15 minutes till the issue is resolved. All in all from my experiences TTD is not bad in terms of down time and MF seems to be old faithful for a ride of its size.

Thabto said:
I've only seen...

Anecdotes don't really describe the bigger problem, for which there is plenty of data. Sure, you like the rides, and a lot of people do. A lot of people like the more reliable rides too, and those have a lower cost-per-ride and greater capacity. Which one is a better investment? Obviously the latter.

I'm surprised no one has really mentioned efficiency and capacity.

B&M clearly is no comparison to Intamin in terms of moving through a line. B&M's have higher capacity trains, and from my experience, are more capable of hitting interval (ex: Raptor, Mantis, Gatekeeper, Leviathan, Behemoth, Banshee).

Even with workers practically sprinting to check restraints, Intamin rides are just not capable of keeping up with interval. Also, they are lower capacity trains.

Jeff said:

A lot of people like the more reliable rides too, and those have a lower cost-per-ride and greater capacity. Which one is a better investment? Obviously the latter.

I disagree with this, Jeff.

The ride that is the better investment is the one that brings people to the park where they would otherwise stay home, among many other complex factors to which we, as enthusiasts, are not privy.

If the key determining factors of ROI were cost-per-ride and capacity, one could argue that the CPLE train or something similar would be a better investment than something like, say, TTD.

For their faults, MF, and later TTD, really made CP stand out as THE place to go if you want the ultimate in thrill rides. And those are Intamin rides. The same cannot be said for GK, Raptor, Diamondback/Banshee (though I LOVE the former), etc.

I think there's value to the park in the image that those rides have afforded them. Putting in another B&M ride, even a halfway decent one, and even with a higher perceived ROI, may not have the same effect on the bottom line that something more cutting-edge, risky, etc from Intamin might have.

Note: I'm not necessarily saying Intamins are cutting edge and extreme while B&M's are boring. I'm just making the point that, from my limited view, it seems incorrect to say that cost-per-ride and reliability make one ride a better investment over another. And certainly not capacity. Most of the general public is oblivious to capacity differential between rides, or how fast/slow the line moves.

Ding ding ding.

MaverickLaunch said:
The ride that is the better investment is the one that brings people to the park where they would otherwise stay home, among many other complex factors to which we, as enthusiasts, are not privy.

I have been privy to certain situations around the industry, so there is that. A ride that builds a reputation for being down, or in certain cases is publicly shamed to a late opening or extended closure (as in three of the last four Intamin rides at Cedar Point), it isn't good for attendance. Furthermore, if you look specifically at roller coasters, historically the greatest gains have come with B&M's (Raptor at CP, Batman at SFGAm, and I bet Banshee makes significant gains at KI this year). They've certainly given more rides than their Intamin cousins, no contest. Less maintenance cost, more up time, higher capacity combine for a lower cost-per-rider.

Cedar Fair certainly seemed to think Intamin was a decent investment for years, even after all the problems with Top Thrill Dragster. Dragster and Millennium Force were the attractions that got me (and my friends/family) to make repeat trips from Minnesota to the Point. That being said, I'd prefer a high capacity B&M as the next coaster.

From what I understand, the highest seasonal attendance at CP was the year Raptor opened, a B&M ride. Furthermore, what do you think causes higher guest satisfaction, waiting for a closed ride to reopen or moving swiftly through a fast moving line to get a ride on Gatekeeper?

For me, Gatekeeper has turned into one of the most fun rides in the park, I've been on it more this year than any other coaster. I'm glad CF is going with more B&M rides, and I bet they may not even be the lowest bidder. There is a lot of good that comes from installing a high quality machine, both from the standpoint of the park and the guests.

No, the former boss just thought it was OK to be cheap. :)

MaverickLaunch said:

The same cannot be said for GK, Raptor...

Raptor? To echo what Pete said, I remember Raptor being a huge draw when it first opened 20 years ago. Park patrons would run to Raptor and Magnum, like they do to MF and TTD today.

meanstreak92 said:
B&M clearly is no comparison to Intamin in terms of moving through a line. B&M's have higher capacity trains, and from my experience, are more capable of hitting interval (ex: Raptor, Mantis, Gatekeeper, Leviathan, Behemoth, Banshee).

Well, the number of passengers per train isn't always lower with Intamin. Millennium Force holds 36 people per train, as does Magnum. Raptor and Gatekeeper both have 32 passenger trains.

B&M however, does seem to design rides that can load and dispatch much faster than Intamin.