Shoot the Rapids - Height Limits

The height change apparently occurred at the very last minute. I suspect it was related to the state inspection.

I have found a few solutions to Cedar Point's "you are too small" and "you are exceptionally sized" program. I call them Kennywood, Idlewild, and Hershey Park.

newyorkmom said:
i'm glad to see that your concerned with your children's safety, that is the point of a height requirement. There are plenty of other things for kids to do in the park other than ride Shoot The Rapids. Yes, it was annoying for then to change it, but if they did i'm sure it was for a good reason. So what, they have to wait another year, i would rather my kids be safe than sorry.

Her safety is my #1 priority, but when she can ride the exact same rides at other parks....something is wrong with that. And like I said before, she is bored with the kiddie rides.

If it was not safe for her to ride a certain ride, she would not be able to ride it at any park. And that brings me back to my first point.

We just went to busch gardens, and she went on the wave swinger there about a dozen times. She loves that ride. But the EXACT same ride at cedar point, you have to be 48" to ride. Same goes for the witches wheel. She can ride the one at six flags at 42", but at cedar point, she has to be 54" tall.

Another example is the mine ride. She only has to be 42" to ride other mine rides that are ruffer and longer than cedar points mine ride. At cedar point, you have to be 48" to ride the mine ride. They are all made by arrow as well.

Cedar points mine ride(also classified as a High thrill ride btw)

http://www.cedarpoint.com/public/park/rides/coasters/cedar_creek_mine_ride/

Six flags mine ride(classified as a moderate thrill ride btw)

http://www.sixflags.com/overGeorgia/rides/AllRides.aspx

The point is, why are cedar points height requirements more than what other parks have? There have been no issues or problems with the height requirements at other parks, so I don't think it's a safety issue.

Maybe CP should have just waited till the inspection to announce the height limit? Just a thought.

I know having a daughter who for 2 years was too short for Raptor sucked. But my other daughter and myself will never forget that very 1st ride she finally got to take when she was finally tall enough.

Priceless! :)

Jo
Lifetime Raptor flights: 2030 :)

crazy horse said:

We just went to busch gardens, and she went on the wave swinger there about a dozen times. She loves that ride. But the EXACT same ride at cedar point, you have to be 48" to ride. Same goes for the witches wheel. She can ride the one at six flags at 42", but at cedar point, she has to be 54" tall.

Another example is the mine ride. She only has to be 42" to ride other mine rides that are ruffer and longer than cedar points mine ride. At cedar point, you have to be 48" to ride the mine ride. They are all made by arrow as well.

Cedar points mine ride(also classified as a High thrill ride btw)

The point is, why are cedar points height requirements more than what other parks have? There have been no issues or problems with the height requirements at other parks, so I don't think it's a safety issue.

-All of Busch Gardens roller coasters are either comparable or even higher in height requirement than Cedar Point. Apollo's Chariot > Magnum, Alpengiest = Raptor, Big Bad Wolf was = Iron Dragon, and Loch Ness is = Corkscrew.

-Most other Mine Trains (for the exceptions of the 40+ year Arrow ones), all have a different train design that have a custom fit lap bar for each rider or each row rather than CP's Mine Ride. Goldrusher at Magic Mountain has the exact same height requirement has Cedar Points mine train.

-On Pilgrams Plunge at Holiday world, the rider must be 48 inches tall. The ride has nearly identical boats as Shoot the Rapids. It shows that Cedar Point is being totally fair with its height requirement.

Cedar Fair is probably the most cautious with their safety. Look how many deaths there have been at Six Flags Parks versus Cedar Fair. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incidents_at_Six_Flags_parks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incidents_at_Cedar_Fair_parks

coolkid2345 said:

-All of Busch Gardens roller coasters are either comparable or even higher in height requirement than Cedar Point. Apollo's Chariot > Magnum, Alpengiest = Raptor, Big Bad Wolf was = Iron Dragon, and Loch Ness is = Corkscrew.

-Most other Mine Trains (for the exceptions of the 40+ year Arrow ones), all have a different train design that have a custom fit lap bar for each rider or each row rather than CP's Mine Ride. Goldrusher at Magic Mountain has the exact same height requirement has Cedar Points mine train.

-On Pilgrams Plunge at Holiday world, the rider must be 48 inches tall. The ride has nearly identical boats as Shoot the Rapids. It shows that Cedar Point is being totally fair with its height requirement.

Cedar Fair is probably the most cautious with their safety. Look how many deaths there have been at Six Flags Parks versus Cedar Fair. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incidents_at_Six_Flags_parks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incidents_at_Cedar_Fair_parks

Most of those deaths at six flags were adults on larger rides.One of the kids died because she had a heart condition, and one was a shooting in the parking lot.

The same thing happens at cedar point a few years ago with a girl on wildcat. She had a heart condition, and died on the ride.

Again, this all has nothig to do with weather or not a ride has the proper height requirement.

You named 1 mine train out of how many? I think you get my point. Pilgrams plunge is a much taller/faster ride, and the only thing it has in common with str is the boats, and intamin. So again, your argument is weak.

You are comparing the larger coasters at busch gardens, to cedar points larger coasters? Of course she can't get on rides like apollo or griffin or magnum or raptor. even if she could, I probaly woulden't let her. I am tlking about the so called "family" coasters.

But you said something about big bad wolf. If it were still around, she would be able to ride it because it too had a 42" height requirement. Even though it was much faster and taller than iron dragon. Iron dragon has a 46" height mark.

Your arguments are weak.

If you're that concerned about the height restrictions then go to a different park this year and go to Cedar Point when your child is tall enough. There's no use arguing about the height restrictions, you won't be able to change them just by screaming about it.

At CP, sure some of the kids seem bummed they can't ride things, but the PARENTS are the ones that make a scene and get really aggravated. If I were a kid, that would be more embarrassing than simply being turned away.

My grandparents didn't even take me to Cedar Point with my sister until I was 48 inches tall. So by the time I was able to go I'd heard all about the rides from my sister and read all the getaway guides, and had a great time. Getting turned away from Raptor and Mantis didn't ruin my trip either.

Ok, so will STR handle "guests of exceptional size" like me?

I was always under the assumption that the aggressive approach to safety fell on the shoulders of the Dept. of Agriculture that does the inspections, and laws pertaining to Ohio specifically. Adventure Express at KI (their version of the Mine Ride) also has a height restriction of 48 inches...so it's not just Cedar Point. It's either Ohio, or Cedar Fair...not Cedar Point specifically.

There is more for kids to do now at Cedar Point than there ever was when I was 3, 4, 5, or 7 (I'm 33)...and I always had a blast. I really don't understand all the complaining.

I am not going to take her to the park anymore.

We will be going as a family to six flags for now on where we can ride things together. You know...a park where familys can actualy ride things together. Sure I will still go to cedar point with friends this year, as I already have a season pass and may as well use it.That will change next year. There is no value for a family at cedar point.

If your at cedar point, and have a person that is 42" tall....your kinda screwed unless they still want to ride the kiddie rides.

We just cancelled our trip for the 4th of july. The main reason we were going was so that we could all ride the new ride together. My daughter was beyond excited to ride the new ride. We will be going to another park now.

And it's not just me that is bummed about her not being able to ride anything but kiddie rides at the park. She is very bummed and confused about why she can ride a ride at one park, but not the exact same ride at cedar point.

Kevinj said:
I was always under the assumption that the aggressive approach to safety fell on the shoulders of the Dept. of Agriculture that does the inspections, and laws pertaining to Ohio specifically. Adventure Express at KI (their version of the Mine Ride) also has a height restriction of 48 inches...so it's not just Cedar Point. It's either Ohio, or Cedar Fair...not Cedar Point specifically.

There is more for kids to do now at Cedar Point than there ever was when I was 3, 4, 5, or 7 (I'm 33)...and I always had a blast. I really don't understand all the complaining.

It's a cedar fair thing...not JUST cedar point. We don't have these issues at most other park chains.

She can ride some rides at cedar point....they are all of the kiddie variaty only. She has grown out of those. She gets bored on those type of rides.

Have height restrictions gone up since we were kids? Let me rephrase...I was a kid in the early 1980's...so have things changed since back then, or has CF always been this aggressive with height restrictions?

I'd say your situation with your daughter is very unique. She seems beyond her height and years in seeking thrills.

It's crazy to say there's no value for families at Cedar Point.

^^I would say ever since they put in Iron Dragon they have been really aggressive with the height requirements.

I am probably gonna get some hype about what I am gonna say but I am VERY HAPPY about the change on STR in height requirement because it is really annoying when the little kiddos don't know how to open the gate or they don't know how to use the restraint.

In my opinion, if someone is going to bitch about the height requirement and the park caring about your childes safety, don't go to the park; even though there are 29 rides someone can ride with their kids and 18 rides for the little ones to ride alone, have fun at Six Flags or something.

crazy horse said:

Kevinj said:
I was always under the assumption that the aggressive approach to safety fell on the shoulders of the Dept. of Agriculture that does the inspections, and laws pertaining to Ohio specifically. Adventure Express at KI (their version of the Mine Ride) also has a height restriction of 48 inches...so it's not just Cedar Point. It's either Ohio, or Cedar Fair...not Cedar Point specifically.

There is more for kids to do now at Cedar Point than there ever was when I was 3, 4, 5, or 7 (I'm 33)...and I always had a blast. I really don't understand all the complaining.

It's a cedar fair thing...not JUST cedar point. We don't have these issues at most other park chains.

She can ride some rides at cedar point....they are all of the kiddie variaty only. She has grown out of those. She gets bored on those type of rides.

Yeah it is Cedar Fair, the mine train at Carowinds was 36" after Cedar Fair took over the next year it went to 48" I think that is worse than raising the requirement for STR. If a kid was 36" and was able to ride the mine train then the next year they are told they are too short and have to wait at least a couple of years, that would really anger people. Trailblazer at Hershey used to allow kids under 36" with the old restraints that Mine Ride has. Then when they got the newer individual restraints they raised it to 36" since there was a sign up saying that because of the new restraints, riders under 36" were no longer able to ride.

The "for your safety" thing is kind of a cop out. Do parks with lower height limits not care about safety?

Everyone wants you to be safe. It's then a question of how will each park/state/manufacturer (and the various combinations) define that minimum safety standard. Whether some end up being too restrictive seems like a fair discussion.

Kevinj said:
There is more for kids to do now at Cedar Point than there ever was when I was 3, 4, 5, or 7 (I'm 33)...and I always had a blast. I really don't understand all the complaining.

I'm 33, too... and though that may be technically true that there are more things to do, I think the park really misses Jungle Larry, the dolphins, street entertainers (the hobo band), and the Mill Race (ok, that last one is a stretch). I'd rather have those back than lower height restrictions.

I never liked singing / dancing / ice skating shows as a kid, so even the IMAX seems better.

But... I also just liked looking at all of those awesome machines and trying to figure out how they worked, even if I was too short to ride.

Kevinj said:
...And wasn't WWL's height limit 46 inches as well?

46 inches OR accompanied by an adult.

A few thoughts:

To me, the problem here is not the height restriction itself - but the fact that Cedar Point (or whoever) changed the height restriction after announcing that it would be 42." I'm not willing to give the park a free pass for that. If there was even a shadow of a doubt that the height restriction was not set in stone and had the possibility of being raised, then they should have waited to announce it until they were sure. "Over-promise, under-deliver" is never the right way, in any industry.

I would imagine that if Cedar Point had announced that the height restriction would be 48" in the first place, crazy horse and others would have been disappointed that Cedar Point built another ride that his entire family couldn't ride, but they wouldn't be as upset as they are now.

I also wonder if any of the Red Cross riders were children of bidders - what if some of them weren't tall enough to take the ride their parents paid for?

Imagine for a moment how much of an uproar there would be here if Cedar Point had built a new coaster with a height restriction of 52," only to change it the day it opened to 72," a height that leaves out a large portion of the population. I know that's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but the point I'm trying to make is that it's easy to give the park a free pass on something that doesn't effect you.

For the record, I have no children and am above the required 46" height requirement.

A riverblaster attraction would have been a better fit.