Was Maverick The Right Choice?

Maverick has now been running for a year. Before and since it had open last Memorial Day weekend it has had problems. My question is; Was Maverick the right choice? Should Cedar Point tried another style or tried another vendor to build another type (or the same) coaster?

Intamin has made every coaster that Cedar Point has added since 2000. Millennium Force, Wicked Twister, Top Thrill Dragster and now Maverick, three of the four coasters have had some major problems (or have had some lengthy downtime). Did Cedar Point make the right choice choosing Intamin?

Well, with MF they hit a home run, similar to Magnum a decade prior. WT and TTD are successes in their own right, and Maverick has won critical acclaim, and is widely recognized as success amongst the coaster crowd.

What is your logic behind suggesting there was some other direction they "should have gone"? Hindsight isn't using logic; every new installation comes with some degree of calculated risk; some (i.e., MF) pay off in a much bigger way than others (TTD).

I really haven't heard somebody think cedar point shouldn't have built intamin rides... What else should they have built? Vekoma rides? haha... Yeah, I can picture them building a boomerang, and then a suspended looping coaster, and then one of those flying coasters they have... Um. No. I think intamin is certainly the best... Then B&M.

But don't most rides have problems when they first come out anyway?

Intamin does build great rides. But the downtime could happen on any ride at any time, and on any type of coaster. Yes CP did the right choice with Maverick, IMO

^^Intaimin rides are good rides when they operate. Yes when they first come out most rides do have their glitches. Maverick has been out for over a year and still is having some major downtime. Top Thrill Dragster well after (and still is) opening has had its problems. Wicked Twister has had its share of problems.

Where I'm going with this is all of the rides I mention are Intamin rides. Sure Millennium Force is one of greatest coasters ever built but does that mean every new coaster has to be an Intamin? Especially after the last two have had some major problems.

Don't get me wrong I love the rides Intamin has built, but I would love them even better if they operated more efficiently. After the last two coasters had problems don't you think Cedar Point would be a little more hesitant on adding another coaster, especially a prototype coaster?

But don't most rides have problems when they first come out anyway?

That is exactly what I was going to say. The last coaster built at CP before MF was Magnum. I am sure all of the coasters probably had their problems at first, because they were new coasters. You probably just don't remember, because that was so long ago.

I remember when MF was first built and had tons of down time. But now the majority of the time (knock on wood), it is doing fine...just like WT and TTD. And I am sure that once they get all of the kinks out of Maverick, it won't have much down time eathier.

Besides, down time or not...those are 3 of the 17 coasters that makes Cedar Point such a great place. I do not think that they made the wrong decision no matter how many problems the coasters have.

^There was four coasters built after Magnum, then came MF.

Jesz said:

I remember when MF was first built and had tons of down time. But now the majority of the time (knock on wood), it is doing fine...just like WT and TTD. And I am sure that once they get all of the kinks out of Maverick, it won't have much down time eathier.

Besides, down time or not...those are 3 of the 17 coasters that makes Cedar Point such a great place. I do not think that they made the wrong decision no matter how many problems the coasters have.

Wicked Twister and Top Thrill Dragster are doing find (better than the last couple of years) but they still do not perform as well as a regular coaster. Grant it those two are very unique compared to many other roller coasters.

Also those three coasters aren't the only things that make Cedar Point a great place.

They need to consider in the future a euro-fighter, and a dive machine, and a B&M or two. Than a real dark ride, and if they ever feel like retiring any of the "childrens coasters"...replace them as well with appropriate rides.

Scrap that crap coaster Mean Streak and put in a real wooden one like Shivering Timbers or something of that nature. That is if you even want to have wooden coasters.... (why the hell would you waste the space with that thing (Mean Streak)).

They have a unique set of awesome coasters. Keep it that way....just continue to expand upon the unique coasters offered.

I don't think this is an illogical thread at all. ChrisC is inviting us to armchair quarterback with 20/20 hindsight -- an activity perfectly suited for such a forum.

It's not so radical to suggest that, given the spotty reliability issues of MF and TTD, that Cedar Point might have considered going a different route. I'm sure there must have been discussions about the very topic. (No, I don't have a mole in Kinzel's office, but it begs credulity to argue otherwise.)

Choosing Maverick was definitely a gamble, and one that has proven more than worth it -- when the ride works. In that regard it is definitely a corporate sibling to TTD and, to a lesser extent, MF. But CP could just have easily chosen a new Gravity Group woodie or something else.

kylepark said:

^There was four coasters built after Magnum, then came MF.

You're right. I honestly don't know what I was thinking. lol. We can call that a dumb blonde moment right there. But you know what I'm talking about. All of them probably had some problems when they first came out too.

And Ensign Smith is also right. It is a good debate. It is just my personal opinion that they did a good job continuing with Intamin. MF, WT, and TTD all did pretty darn good with the public and media. So sure they would choose for Intamin to build another coaster at CP. I guess for them popularity outwieghed possible down time for the coaster.

I agree with Factory81. Mean Streak would be a really cool coaster if it was steal, because it wouldn't be so rough then. I think that they should replace that one before they replaced any of the smaller coasters. Because the small coasters are good for the kids and older people. But Mean Streak is just not good for anyone or their backs! lol.

Ensign Smith said:
Choosing Maverick was definitely a gamble, and one that has proven more than worth it

I don't know if you can say that since attendance was flat last year. But that could be a number of different things...

^^yeah i agree. im only 17 and im afraid to ride mean streak because of fear of injury that would hurt any of my sports that i play. its just not a fun ride. they could replace it with such a better ride and i hope they do.

I do understand the concern you have raised, but unfortunately, many of you were not around to see the problems that some of the older coasters had. When Magnum was built there were several modifications that had to be made before it became the "workhorse" that it is today. Originally the ride did not have upstop wheels, but rather simply pads. These caused problems, and sparks could sometimes be seen coming from the train as it crested the third hill. Speaking of the third hill, it also had to be reprofiled, because it's original form caused a very rough pullout into the pretzel loop.

If you are walking along the beach boardwalk, and look at the bottom of the 3rd hill, you can see the supports where it previously was tracked.

All this is said to prove the point that even the coasters that are looked upon as the pinnacles of design had their share of problems early on. You also have to remember that each one of the Intamin coasters that CP has built (other than Jr Gemini) has been a first of it's kind, or a record shattering ride. Anytime you do that, you are asking for a break-in period to iron out maintenence and upkeep issues.

Kevinj said:
Well, with MF they hit a home run, similar to Magnum a decade prior. WT and TTD are successes in their own right, and Maverick has won critical acclaim, and is widely recognized as success amongst the coaster crowd.

What is your logic behind suggesting there was some other direction they "should have gone"? Hindsight isn't using logic; every new installation comes with some degree of calculated risk; some (i.e., MF) pay off in a much bigger way than others (TTD).

MF was no home run. 2006 MF had some major downtime I believe it was down for a solid month in the middle of summer, that is besides the fact that it is not fun. Also, NO, MF is not the new Magnum otherwise attendance would be up.

Intamin has a lot of issues with their rides that you typically do not see with other manufactures aka B&M, however, Mavrick is amazing and I am glad to see it at CP.

In the future though I would like to see something different soon like a GG woodie!!

Josh M. said:
I do understand the concern you have raised, but unfortunately, many of you were not around to see the problems that some of the older coasters had. When Magnum was built there were several modifications that had to be made before it became the "workhorse" that it is today. of the 3rd hill, you can see the supports where it previously was tracked.

Yeah, that is what I was trying to say too. :)

MF was not down for a month in 2006. What are you talking about?

And what issues are there with Maverick, once the roll was removed? Aside from some serious issues with Ohio Edison's inability to keep the lights on, it hasn't been a particularly troublesome ride, especially after the multi-year nightmare that Dragster was.

When you have 17 roller coasters, there are only so many variation they've yet to exploit. Maverick was perfect, and judging by the long lines and random people I work with raving about it, it was exactly the right choice.

Maverick is a pretty solid ride, and it doesn't have any more problems than any other launched coaster in the world. It's a tough technology to keep running every day all day without some problems. That doesn't mean that all launched coasters are a mistake though, they're a great addition to roller coaster design, along with being a great change of style from the old chain lifts. And I think it's total blasphemy to say MF isn't fun, but to each his own I suppose.

Problems or not, you cannot do what hasn't been done before and not expect a hiccup.

MF was an expensive big coaster lacking in elements. Meanwhile Maverick has all the elements in the world.

MF was no home run. 2006 MF had some major downtime I believe it was down for a solid month in the middle of summer, that is besides the fact that it is not fun. Also, NO, MF is not the new Magnum otherwise attendance would be up.

I'm not even sure where to begin with this...are you being sarcastic? Because nothing you said makes any sense

But your last point about attendance is probably the dimmest comment of all. If you don't understand what had impacted attendance at CP, it is not worth explaining.

But back to the topic at hand, I do feel that Cedar Point could use some variety. I personally would have liked to see a new wooden coaster within the past 2 decades, but at the same time, I have thouroughly enjoyed Intamin's creations.