To me, the main idea behind any kind of preservation effort is respect for the original ride. If the Dipper were to be rebuilt exactly as it were with new materials, I would consider that a preservation effort to some extent. Of course, if some original/existing material were to be used in the reconstruction, I think it would make it even more of a preservation effort. But that goes back to what I said in the beginning about preservation being more about what each individual sees as preservation. I consider SFA's Wild One to be a preservation effort but there are those that believe the addition of the new helix at the end of the ride and the later changes to the first drop and turnaround keep it from being a preservation effort. Looking at things that way, is the current Big Dipper still the original ride? Rebuilds aside, the original double dip was removed and the shape of the first camelback was altered, making the ride somewhat different that the one John Miller penned in 1925.
It seems it is universally accepted that wood coasters are going to go through changes as they age. Going back to Dorney's Thunderhawk that features no original wood, it is still regarded as a 1923 coaster. If material alone were the very thing that defines the age of a coaster, Thunderhawk would only be as old as the oldest piece of wood on the ride (which makes no sense, in addition to the fact that it's impossible to document the age of every piece of material on the ride). I suppose that the relocation of a wood coaster that winds up needing a lot of new wood is pretty much the same as replacing a lot of wood on a coaster staying in the same spot.
*** Edited 11/8/2007 2:09:31 PM UTC by Rob Ascough***
Big Dipper belongs on the Santa Monica Pier. ;)
*** Edited 11/8/2007 10:30:50 PM UTC by boblogone***
Martling said:
I do not understand why Cedar Fair will not move The Villain to another park.
That is certainly a good question. I'm sure it would require a lot of labor to disassemble, transport, and reassemble that steel at California's Great America. But it seems that not having to purchase new material would be a substantial savings. I find it hard to believe that building a new coaster from scratch would be more economical.
^^^ I forget who, but someone said the cost of reloacting a coaster vs. buying new was about 50 cents on the dollar.
^^$50,000 was the original cost to build it, not it's current sale price.
*** Edited 11/8/2007 11:08:39 PM UTC by Jason Hammond***
884 Coasters, 34 States, 7 Countries
http://www.rollercoasterfreak.com My YouTube
Chuck, just wondering if M&V being involved is a condition. Remember when a park said you can have the coaster, You just gotta supply your own crew and have 2 million in insurance to get it?
...plus shipping and handling. Some assembly required. ;)
*** Edited 11/9/2007 1:46:24 PM UTC by Brian Noble***
Charles Nungester said:See Im having trouble believing the 50 grand price. The fact that M&V is handing this means they will be part of the dissasimbly process. I Wouldn't say they're over priced but M&V isn't cheap.Chuck, just wondering if M&V being involved is a condition. Remember when a park said you can have the coaster, You just gotta supply your own crew and have 2 million in insurance to get it?
On Part 1, I think M&V would be willing to help with disassembly, but that would *in no way* be included in the 50K price.
Part 2....wasn't that Hercules?
Brian Noble said:
$50,000......plus shipping and handling. Some assembly required.
*** Edited 11/9/2007 1:46:24 PM UTC by Brian Noble***
Plus if you call within the next 10 minutes, we'l throw in a second coaster absolutely free! That's two coasters, the pasta cooker, the set of steak knives and a container of Oxy-Clean all for only $50,000! :)
I never said M&V would be willing or not. Im saying it might be a condition that that you have to hire them. AT LEAST FOR dissasembly to get it.
Could be totally bunk but M&V carries their own insurance Im sure of that.
You must be logged in to post