Mantis Future

As far as the heartline argument goes, aren't there people already riding it that might be a foot taller than those who are at the minimum height. My partner is six inches shorter than me and we seem to have no problem riding it. If they were to change it to a sit-down, I am thinking that they could set the seats at any height they wish which would allow more control over where the actual heartline would be.

While I don't mind the ride, itself, as a stand-up, I do dislike the drop in capacity due to the fact that people don't know what standing up means. Ugh!

Am I the only one who thinks Mantis has an incredibly boring layout for a floorless? Especially the second half?

Agreed, the layout was designed to be fun as a stand up, it wouldn't be very entertaining as a sit down.

I feel the same way, it's designed to stand up. This topic has now far reached past thread the needle status.

Zoug68 said:
As far as the heartline argument goes, aren't there people already riding it that might be a foot taller than those who are at the minimum height.

I tried mentioning this a few pages back only to be shot down instantly

The only people who I'm going to listen to that say "it can't be done" or "it can be done" are the engineers of the ride and last time I checked, nobody here is one.

Dead Sexeh said:
Yes when your center of gravity is farther away from your axis of rotation it will be harder to stand up, but what does that prove?

You're ignoring inertia, and how it affects the body. A seated rider carries their weight on their back and their buttocks. A standing rider carries their weight on their back and their feet. You can't change that dynamic and expect the same result.

Zoug68 said:
If they were to change it to a sit-down, I am thinking that they could set the seats at any height they wish which would allow more control over where the actual heartline would be.

They can't set the seats at any height they wish. They could set the seats at any height that would be demonstrably safe for riders, which is a rather more narrow range than "any height they wish".

I have to agree with Brian about how this whole thing is going to go down. I know a few of you guys said it would be boring, but at least it would be more fun and enjoyable to ride. A lot of people I talk to say they cannot stand Mantis because it gives them a head ache. In my opinion, a Transformation might help out the ride experience.

They get a headache from banging their heads off the restraints. Is the assumption that there would be no headbanging with floorless trains? Because I'm pretty dang certain that there will still be headbanging.

This is seriously a case of "painting a turd a different color".

^^^ Yep... People don't like mantis because it is rough, or boring, or bangs your head around. But somehow, putting some floorless trains on it will instantly cure all these issues. Of course the track will remain the same as there is no need to change it...

Yea, it makes perfect sense to me - I can't believe CP hasn't done it yet.

You forgot they are going to paint the track...which makes a huge difference of course. :)

Thabto said:
The only people who I'm going to listen to that say "it can't be done" or "it can be done" are the engineers of the ride and last time I checked, nobody here is one.

How about you ask the only question that really matters: "should it be done".

Aside from the annual enthusiast fantasy of converting Mantis, there has been absolutely zero evidence that it should or will be converted into a floorless.

Yep. This is precisely like the re-do Mean Streak argument.

Cedar Point should do this.

Cedar Point should do that.

Could they? Of course.

But I would add, DJ, that in all honesty there very well could be evidence on McClure's table that says, 'this ride either needs some TLC or should be considered for removal'.

We have no idea what ridership and maintenance costs really look like, nor do we know what it would take to actually do a re-do.

But to speculate that such evidence exists seems a little silly. It's fun to fantasize and whip out RTC2 and make your own little Cedar Point, but if a coaster truly has reached the end of it's life it seems much more likely to me that said attraction would simply be removed, unless it holds some type of historical significance to the park, which Mantis (or Mean Streak) does not.

This all goes back to my (and Pete's ) question. Why now?

Then again, we get the annual Mean Streak threads and ideas, so I guess now it's Mantis' turn.

I'm still getting over my glee of not having to see anymore Disaster Transport TEAR IT DOWN!!1111!! threads.

Or having to see Disaster Transport.

Cedar Point shoulda torn that down years ago! Nobody rode it! Oops. :)

I would never suggest that Mantis will definitely not be converted into a floorless, because it might very well be that CF finds value in such an investment. But the point here is that there's absolutely nothing to suggest CF is even considering that.

And I've yet to see anyone come close to making something resembling a reasonable ROI justification. It's been a bunch of silly back-and-forth about "can it be done?"

Of course it can be done. But at what cost?

The funny thing is that there's actually more to suggest that MS will be re-done than there is to suggest anything will happen to Mantis (aside from new paint). After all, even MS's twin was re-done.

Of course, I should know better than to expect anything else from the annual wave of RCT-drunk armchair CEO's.

When does school start again? ;)

9 days in my house.

Not that I'm counting.

:)

As long as this is still around - I have never ridden a floorless coaster. That being said, how much different is the experience than say GK or Raptor? I have watched some videos of them but of course you cant tell much from that. I simply do not see where it would be a truly unique experience for a park that already has an inverted and a winged coaster.

Interestingly, the floorless style is more similar to a B&M sit-down than to anything else (looking only at train style, rather than layout), since it's essentially a standard sit-down train without all the cladding.

In that sense, it would be a unique style compared to what CP offers. Of course, the exact same is true of a floorless model.

My experience is that floorless coasters are best experienced in the front seat. The seats are supported from below and behind, so in the front seat it seems like you're suspended in air, nothing above you, only the track speeding by below you. In other seats the floorless aspect never seemed particularly noticeable to me.

Kevinj said:
Or having to see Disaster Transport.

Cedar Point shoulda torn that down years ago! Nobody rode it! Oops. :)

I see the smiley face so I'm not too sure if you're being sarcastic or truly believe this, however, 2011 hit 1 million riders at DT...so I'm not too sure we can say nobody ever rode it.

The whole floorless rumor on Mantis is interesting to me. I'm just trying to imagine them removing the existing concrete in the station to accommodate the drop floor if they went with the floorless design. Not to mention, the layout is already boring enough, especially after the MCBR.