Mean Streak?

^ not MF, but could be better than Maverick if done correctly, thats just my opinion

Captain Hawkeye said:
RMC could make Mean Streak better than Maverick or MF? No one has nearly enough fairy dust & unicorn powder to accomplish that.

Have you even been on an RMC conversion? Twisted Colossus easily has raced (ha...ha...) its way into my top few coasters, and the other RMCs are up there too.

And Colossus was, like MS, a trimmed, neutered woodie with slow turns and an occasionally jarring ride. TX Giant was MS' smaller sister coaster. Rattler was, like MS, a large, neutered woodie. All these rides are now world-class steel coasters courtesy of RMC.

Captain Hawkeye said:

RMC could make Mean Streak better than Maverick or MF? No one has nearly enough fairy dust & unicorn powder to accomplish that.

Yes?! Look at the POV's of Wildfire and Lightning Run and tell me you don't think it's possible. I've only been on Twisted Colossus, and I have that ranked only one spot lower than Millennium Force on my rankings (well below Maverick, however). I've also heard Twisted Colossus is one of the lesser conversions they have made thus far.

Anything is possible. I have a 100 foot tall wooden coaster (PHOENIX) ranked over MIllennium Force and in my top 5 all time, I'm not about to rule anything out

"Better" happens to be an opinion, and not a fact. I think a GCI/GG reprofiling is "better" than an RMC conversion.

I don't assume my opinion is the same as anyone else, though.

For what it's worth, I think The Beast is better than Phoenix, and Millennium Force is better than Fury 325. And all of those are better than Maverick.

I guess my question for those who would prefer a GCI re-profiling would be what about Mean Streak's layout do you think should be kept? Because as far as I know, GCI only re-profiles, they don't change layouts to the degree that an Iron Horse conversion would.

To me, the roughness isn't the only issue with Mean Streak. It's that the layout is generally boring with wasted, drawn out curves, especially in the last half of the ride.

I'm assuming that's not an issue for you?

When GCI was called to fix RWB they modified the ride with more hills and turns in the final 3rd of the ride. While they don't often reprofile rides to that degree, they are capable of altering layouts enough to make them more enjoyable.

DRE420 said:
^ not MF, but could be better than Maverick if done correctly, thats just my opinion

Now let's not judge a coaster that hasn't even been designed yet. Any coaster has the potential to be better than Maverick or MF.

CP Maverick, I feel like the problem structurally that's been brought up before is that the train shuffles on those notorious tall, banked turns. That seems like the sort of thing that even if GCI re-profiled the ride that it wouldn't necessarily fix that. Not to mention that they would really have to do some work to the structure to make sure the second half of the ride isn't as boring as it is now.

A full reworking from RMC would be perfect to give it the punch the ride needs to really be a fun ride.

What about a full reworking from GCI?

CP Maverick said:
"Better" happens to be an opinion, and not a fact. I think a GCI/GG reprofiling is "better" than an RMC conversion.

I don't assume my opinion is the same as anyone else, though.

For what it's worth, I think The Beast is better than Phoenix, and Millennium Force is better than Fury 325. And all of those are better than Maverick.

Every one of your opinions differ from mine. RMC>GCI. Phoenix > Beast. Fury325 > Millennium Force. Maverick >> all of those mentioned.

Chuck, I still have yet to see GCI work on something of that scale.

I feel like Maverick is trolling in here, how many other people are looking at GCI as the better option? Show of hands? Anybody at all? Nobody?!

Count me in on wanting RMC to tackle Mean Streak and GCI build a second woodie from scratch.

Chuck Wagon said:

What about a full reworking from GCI?

The problem with that is you're still constrained to some degree by the original layout. At a certain point, the ROI of a full reworking doesn't look as appealing and/or marketable as having RMC come in and do their thing. GCI can build a great coaster elsewhere in the park, with fewer constraints.

Given the choice, I too would choose an RMC "iron horse" treatment. My point is that GCI did major renovations on both GhostRider and The Legend this year. Some folks seem to imply that GCI would be "incapable" of dramatically changing the ride. I think that is false. If Cedar Point wanted GCI to turn Mean Streak into an air time wooden coaster, I'm sure they could do it. Ultimately, that might be cost prohibitive compared to a new GCI, but we don't have access to that much information.

Also, consider these quotes from a recent LA Times article:

Knott’s considered bids from Rocky Mountain and Great Coasters International and decided to go with GCI in part to maintain GhostRider’s traditional wooden coaster feel that fits so well with the Ghost Town theme of the area surrounding the ride, Gahagan said.

Comparisons between GhostRider and Colossus at Six Flags Magic Mountain were inevitable. Rocky Mountain transformed the 1978 Magic Mountain wooden coaster into the Twisted Colossus hybrid coaster in 2015 with the addition of several mind-bending inversions.

Both parks made the right decisions for their demographics, with Knott’s maintaining GhostRider as a family ride and Magic Mountain turning Colossus into a thrill ride.

Article: http://www.latimes.com/travel/themeparks/la-tr-knotts-ghostrider-re...story.html

Chuck Wagon said:

My point is that GCI did major renovations on both GhostRider and The Legend this year.

Prior to GCI's work on those rides, they were considered very good coasters, ranking in the top 100 in Mitch's poll. The 5-year averages (as of 2013, the most recent poll) for GhostRider and The Legend were 57 and 41, respectively. Mean Streak's 5-year average was 162. Mean Streak isn't even in the same sport as the others you mention, let alone the same league.

Surely GhostRider's existing status and popularity was part of the reason that Knott's went with GCI over RMC. Putting MS through the same equation would not likely yield the same result.

I suspect the fact that Cedar Fair has NEVER used RMC while they have have used GCI on several jobs was a bigger reason that RMC was not used.

Low Bid was probably the main reason.

To reiterate; I know that GCI could make MS amazing. With that said, in a few short years it'll need redone -again- as wood deteriorates.. And deteriorates rather quickly with Lake Erie weather systems. It's not about the right now, it's all about sustainability.

Well that depends. They have done a good job maintaining the ride so far. I don't see why it would be any different with GCI in the mix. The trims were a "fix" to the ride being poorly designed to start with.

CP Maverick said:
When GCI was called to fix RWB they modified the ride with more hills and turns in the final 3rd of the ride. While they don't often reprofile rides to that degree, they are capable of altering layouts enough to make them more enjoyable.

Was Wolf Bobs' layout altered that much? I remember they added the little pop after the first turnaround and flattened the turns a bit. But it has been a decade now and Wolf Bobs 2.0 wasn't around long so I don't have that much of a memory about it.

I also thought Wolf Bobs 2.0 was very underwhelming, although I know some liked it.

From the top down, it was almost dead on. But they did add a few little hills and twists to the ride. Sadly, I can't find any POV footage to show the difference. It was a huge improvement over what it had been.

While I think an RMC conversion would be superior (and yes I love true wooden coasters) does the issues with the two latest RMC coasters give anyone a pause?

I'm sure they will get the current issues hammered out but still...