Dangling Feet - CoasterBuzz

I have to agree with the Beemer speed coaster trains being nice and roomy and almost floorless. I'm 6'4'' and if I lean back in my seat I can dangle my legs.

-----------------
I'm a Jay, Jay, Jay Jay Hawk!

One word explains it all....... Wildfire.

Only B&M I've liked, althought I admit I've only been on 4. :P

Wahoo! Nitro is the best Bolliger and Mabillard creation ever! Look how 4 years old that sounds. Go to some other coaster board and debate that pointless topic. And my point is that it says in the TOS not to discuss topics such as "the best" and "-est" topics on this board go to some other coaster messageboard and debate that boring and pointless 5 year old topic. Second to that, I reread the paragraph and I cant tell if he is indeed referring to the train design or Nitro the rollercoaster-peace-D

*** This post was edited by DorneyDante on 9/16/2002. ***

While I'm bound to enjoy almost any coaster, inverted or sit-down, I'm partial to the airtime of a sit-down like Nitro. Each has its pluses of course, but to each their own.

-----------------
I'm at rutgers! But I never went there! Check it out! http://rutgers-newark.rutgers.edu/ I'm all the way to the left, I wear glasses.
"The moose says you're closed, I say you're open!" - Clark W. Griswold
"We love Megan!"

I've never been on a floorless, per say, but I've never known anyone who's feat touch the floor on Raging Bull, and I think that definitely adds to the experience. On inverted coasters, though, what would the ride be if it had a floor? Not much, in my opinion. That feeling you get when you fly into an in-line twist, and you see your feet suddenly fling out, right into a collison course with that support up ahead...

It might be equalled, but it can't be beat.

Ok, I generally give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to intelligence. But the person who started this topic obviously has none.

Granted, he may not enjoy having his feet dangle. But is he too naive to understand that the less restraint there is, the greater the sense of danger and therefore a greater thrill?

Are you too naive to understand that there is virtually no difference between a floorless ride and a sitdown ride, besides price no doubt... Many people's feet dangle on a normal B&M sitdown anyways, and as for sense of danger... It's a B&M. Who's the one with no intelligence? Perhaps you should get a... Oh what are they called... Oh yes, a "clue" before posting.

-----------------
.:| Brandon Rodriguez |:.
http://www.coasters2k.com

Bosshawk said:
When will someone design an inverted stand-up anyway??

That would be very hard to design without hurting the family jewels.

Also it isn't impossible to design you could have a spine like device to stand on connecting to the ride overhead and have regular stand up restraints although your feet wouldn't dangle you still would be on a standup inverted. Although I would consider it a stand up suspended since there is a small floor below you.

*** This post was edited by Coaster Sam on 9/16/2002. ***

I'll have to admit I'd take Wildfire's trains over any other looping coaster's train - with or without a floor - anyday. They should re-fit Kumba with a set of those.

They would be a little weird on an invert, though.;)

Without the chaindog, you'd never get up the lifthill...

*** This post was edited by Chaindog on 9/16/2002. ***

BrandonR said:

Are you too naive to understand that there is virtually no difference between a floorless ride and a sitdown ride...[snip]
Many people's feet dangle on a normal B&M sitdown anyways...[snip]

Eh? You're saying peoples' legs dangle on Kumba or Hulk? How short are these people? I think the Wildfire trains are *much* more open than Kumba or Hulk's.

Have you ridden those coasters before? I can't imagine you not noticing a difference between the two seating styles. At 5'11", I am completely flat footed on Kumba/Hulk, but on Wildfire (or any of the speed coasters, for that matter), my legs be danglin' in the wind.

Joe, who still doesn't get it when people say "the only noticeable difference on a floorless is in the front." Um, since when could you stretch your legs completely out on Kumba? Uh huh....

-----------------
It tastes like burning.

I've never had the pleasure of riding a floorless. But both my husband (6'5") and I loved Raging Bull's trains. The seats and restraints gave the impression of being a floorless for us.

-----------------
I'd rather die living than live like I'm dead

Joe, the funny thing is, that guy runs (or moderates) a coaster website. You're right, by the way. I'm 6-2 and I couldn't do any such thing on the Hulk... it was COMFORTABLE, but not exactly roomy.

-----------------
Go Gamecocks!!

*** This post was edited by Homey G. on 9/17/2002. ***

Coaster Sam said:

That would be very hard to design without hurting the family jewels.
Also it isn't impossible to design you could have a spine like device to stand on connecting to the ride overhead and have regular stand up restraints although your feet wouldn't dangle you still would be on a standup inverted. Although I would consider it a stand up suspended since there is a small floor below you.
*** This post was edited by Coaster Sam on 9/16/2002. ***

I agree. I true stand-up inverted would be virtually impossible. What I am picturing is the exact same restraint system and floor as a stand-up, only with the track over-head. There would be a small platform under everyone's feet to stand-on.

I think that the only time when dangling feet are fun, cool or even noticable for that matter are on inverts that have no mesh on the lift hlls. I still get freaked out occasionally on the older inverts without meshes.

What is the point of inverts that have meshes on the lifts? I've discussed this before, but those meshes completely destroy the awseome sense of staring straight down at the ground. this makes inverts kinda pointless. (as you dont notice the dangling legs when on the ride) Except for footchoppers!

i think that dangling feet should be incorporated better on rides.. not just 'a different genre of looper'

-----------------
I AM CANADIAN
why aren't you?

Ok, here I go again. I posted a topic on this as I wasn't talking about dangling feet, but the concept of a stand-up style suspended, if you will. But for unexplicable reasons, it was deleted... I want to know why stand-up inverts would be impossible, but not for the reasons that have been given: a) because they would hurt the "family jewels". First of all, that's really mature... Testicles can't be the reason that it hasn't been tried. That is also a sexist reason, as not everyone on this board is male. b) the car broke off the stick thing. ??!! What stick thing? That's a little vague. c) no one would want one. That is an arguable reason because one hasn't been made, at least not one for the GP to try out, and one has never been installed in a park, therefore that reason is void. Can anyone else please give reasons why other than these? Thank you.

-----------------
Long live Six Flags Astroworld!! Ok, you can all laugh now...

*** This post was edited by drachenfyre on 9/17/2002. ***

bmp143 said:

Ok, I generally give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to intelligence. But the person who started this topic obviously has none.
Granted, he may not enjoy having his feet dangle. But is he too naive to understand that the less restraint there is, the greater the sense of danger and therefore a greater thrill?

I have nothing against having my feet dangle. I am just saying while on a ride, I don't really notice it. No need to criticize me....

-----------------
How many rides must a man go on, before you may call him a fan?

I don't have the slightest idea how you couldn't tell the difference between an inverted and a sit-down. Inverteds give such a different sensation then regular seating.
-------------
TOGO!

PT300 said:
I don't have the slightest idea how you couldn't tell the difference between an inverted and a sit-down. Inverteds give such a different sensation then regular seating.
-------------
TOGO!

I'm not talking about inverted vs. sit down. I am trying to discuss how much impact the 'floorless' effect has on the enthusiast's perception of the ride.

-----------------
How many rides must a man go on, before you may call him a fan?

Uh, I must be blind.

CycloneWacko said:
"I and some B+M inverts (Alpengeist, B:TR, Talon, etc.) and my family and I have never really cared about the fact that our feet were dangling.
"

-------------
TOGO!

Drachenfyre, as I believe I've posted elsewhere, the whole "stick thing" deal is part of a signature, and actually a joke. Now, as to "hurting the family jewels," while it may have been brought up in a humorous manner, it's actually niether sexist nor imature. Putting almost the entire weight of a male right... there, could actually do some serious damage. Furthermore, at least half of all the potential riders for this ride happen to be male. Now, is any manufacturor (sp?) going to produce a ride that could seriously harm half of it's potential clientel? Frankly, that would be stupididty incarnate. And I really don't see how an inverted stand up could be built any onther way, unless (as has already beeen said), there was a small floor.