Mantis Future

Just to follow up - Mantis was a walk on all night July 11th. I agree that busy days like Saturdays on Halloweekends there might be a line, but most days its a walk on.

If anyone sees a line on Mantis that fills queue line take pics becuase of my 8 trips this season I have yet to see any thing that looks like a line.

A walk on for any ride in July doesn't seem right.

Like I said in another thread attendance does seem to be slipping.

I have a remedy. Get rid of the stand-up trains, repaint it, rename it(not King James, that idea is stupid) and advertise it as a new ride, bing, bang, boom, money. That will satisfy the GP.

On the 4th of July while riding the train I did see that the line for Mantis was using a few Que paths just beyond the stairs to the loading platform. Other than that I cannot recall any other time this year where any of the actual que path was being used.

buckeyesbrownsindianscavs said:
I have a remedy. Get rid of the stand-up trains, repaint it, rename it(not King James, that idea is stupid) and advertise it as a new ride, bing, bang, boom, money. That will satisfy the GP.

I tried that Idea, but TTD 120(Adam) told me it wouldn't work.

CPboy77 said:
A walk on for any ride in July doesn't seem right.

Agreed CPboy77. I also forgot to mention that Mantis trains were running with center sections blocked off so trains weren't even being sent out full and there was still no line. Anyone know why they were doing this?

Shawn Meyer said:
[quote}

I tried that Idea, but TTD 120(Adam) told me it wouldn't work.

Just curious Adam - could you explain why another train like a floorless on Mantis wouldn't work?

I never said it wouldn't work from an engineering standpoint. It's definitely possible to do it. But the cost to do it, while cheaper than getting a new ride, just wouldn't work out or be worth it in my opinion. It's just a cheap fix for a problem that doesn't exist with an outcome that is not guaranteed.

So Shawn, please stop implying that my opinion is the end all be all. What I've said is just how I feel on the topic. I can't really make it any more clear. And quite frankly, I'm done arguing it.

^ Sorry Adam. What you told me in the past, I took to heart. That happens with me at times.

Then don't take it to heart.......simple as that. You believe what you want, even if people don't agree with it.

TTD 120mph said:
I never said it wouldn't work from an engineering standpoint. It's definitely possible to do it. But the cost to do it, while cheaper than getting a new ride, just wouldn't work out or be worth it in my opinion. It's just a cheap fix for a problem that doesn't exist with an outcome that is not guaranteed.

Ok, thanks for the clarification, I was thinking you were speaking form an engineering standpoint. Although I respect your opinion, I am not so sure you are correct in your assumptions. CP is lacking is a good floorless coaster, but that's not to say other trains couldn't be considered. I think reusing mostly what is currently there and turning a nearly unrideable hunk of steel into something the GP might actually ride is a great move. Sure I want a new coaster, but making Mantis rideable for less than half the cost of a new coaster seems like a pretty good investment to me.

In truth, neither you or I can guess what the turn out would be. Could be good, could be bad, could be middle of the road. I just don't find it appealing. Now if they rename it to King James and put floorless trains on, I'll lose all hope. :)

I will say this, Cedar Point is lacking a good floorless just as much as they are lacking a good Dive, a B&M hyper, a 4D, a Rocky Mountain, etc etc. It's just one part of a big birthday list that will never be pleased in the enthusiast community.

TTD 120mph said:

I will say this, Cedar Point is lacking a good floorless just as much as they are lacking a good Dive, a B&M hyper, a 4D, a Rocky Mountain, etc etc. It's just one part of a big birthday list that will never be pleased in the enthusiast community.

You are absolutely correct there! Remember this is all pure speculation on what I've observed and what looks more probable then not. But from my recent observations our chances of a floorless are much better than a dive coaster, another hyper, 4D, or a RMC....etc.

I'd say they're all equally possible. ;)

Poor Mantis. It's one of those that has a decent front half, then there's a horrible mid course brake and then the back half sucks. It almost as if they couldn't figure out what to do with the space provided.
With Chang they tried to correct some of that back half mess with a total redesign and I call it mildly successful. I tend to think the trouble spots and the head/neck bashing comes from the flat spin/corkscrew element. Maybe there's something about the rider's body position on these stand ups that just won't allow that element to work.
I've never been on the ride at Magic Mountain, but I understand it's more comfortable than the ones here. I have ridden Scorcher, though, and if I had to pick a favorite standup that would be it. It's smaller, and I don't know what else, but we were so relieved to find they somehow had finally gotten it right. Very little pain there, if any at all.

So back to the ride at hand, I'm not sure new trains would help it, possible or not. It'll still have the same decent start, the same ill-positioned flat spot, and the same crappy ending. The only thing different would be the riders position, and who knows? There's a lot of love out there for Kumba, but for me there's still a fair amount of head banging on that second half, and that would be in a four across seated position, the very thing suggested here by some as a possible cure.
I wonder if B&M's floorless train does anything to bring the riders closer to the track, or if it's the same as a four-across seated ride just without the floor? I've been on quite a few floorless rides, now that I think about it, and even though the same standard B&M elements are present, they seem to be more comfortable. There has to be a reason.

I'm not sure what lead to this discussion- there hasnt been a shred of a hint from Cedar Point that the ride is doomed, right? But If Mantis were to leave one day I wouldn't cry too hard. When it was installed there was a lot of excitement for it, but now it might be considered a foolish, unsuccessful fad. (Unless you live in L.A. or Atlanta, I guess...) If observations are correct, ridership is down. I often hear people say they don't care for Mantis, their first experience was painful and they don't want to take the ride again.
So maybe the park will eventually let it go and come up with something better for that space. It is a nice setting for a ride there. We can hope it's better, anyway.

Here's my question.

The center of gravity for persons on a seated coaster is lower than the center of gravity for persons on a standing coaster.

Are the inversions on a standing coaster designed to accommodate the center of gravity for standing riders? Would that affect the ride experience if seated trains were used on a coaster designed as a stand-up coaster?

Okay, that's actually two questions.

I think that's an implicit reason behind the beliefs on here that the conversion wouldn't help. The course was designed with standing in mind so sitting down would likely make the ride more dull and uneventful.

I haven't been on Mantis in years, but after all the talk here I'll go on it this coming week when we head back to Cedar Point. I know I don't care for the ride... but I can no longer say exactly why... Guess it's time to find out, so long as the wait isn't too long ;)

TTD 120mph said:
Then don't take it to heart.......simple as that. You believe what you want, even if people don't agree with it.

Yeah I have A.D.D and depression issues. I'm on medication for both of them, but still I'm sorry for blowing this out of proportion.

I think after 13 pages of speculation, the most likely thing that will happen to Mantis is NOTHING.

Actually, Pete, I think the most likely thing to happen is normal operation until the end of the season, then off-season refurbishment, then repeat. But then, that's probably what you meant. ;)