I-305 major change?

Thursday, November 4, 2010 3:32 PM
Tekwardo's avatar

But they could put the trims back to where they were before, instead of on the first drop.


Website | Flickr | Instagram | YouTube | Twitter | Facebook

Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 3:37 PM

Lord Gonchar said:

No it's not. That photo is taken from the road behind the park.

The train would be coming at you on that hill.

Yeah, just realized my mistake today when looking at it a little more. Oops! :P

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 3:41 PM
rollergator's avatar

Tekwardo said:
And I don't have a problem with clones. Every ride doesn't have to be unique. I'd love an El Toro, Voyage, Bizarro New England, and Premier Spagetti Bowl at my home park.

With all four of those rides, I'd be willing to have a home-park in Detroit! ;)


You still have Zoidberg.... You ALL have Zoidberg! (V) (;,,;) (V)

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 3:56 PM
James Whitmore's avatar

My guess is that these changes are being made to address the issue of G forces through the first turn and not necessarily to fix the problems with the wheels overheating.

I think the problem with the wheels overheating is a result of the sustained high speeds over the course of the entire ride and not the high G's. I heard someplace the I-305 had the highest everage speed of any coaster.


jameswhitmore.net

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 4:40 PM
OhioStater's avatar

I never knew that Dame Edna Everage was that fast.

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 4:46 PM
Tekwardo's avatar

Why is everyone so hung up on the Gforces? I may have missed it, but I've never heard the park say that that was a problem. Granted, I've not yet ridden the ride, so I can't compare, but I've also yet to hear an enthusiast or someone from the GP that has rode it say that they'd never ride it again based on the Gforces.

Why would that be a factor? If people are still riding it, and I haven't read or been told that they aren't (Well, they're not now, obviously, but that's beside the point), then why would CF go thru all this trouble to 'fix' something that doesn't seem to be broken?

We know that there have been wheel issues, and that could be a money factor.

I've yet to see any convincing information that there was a problem with the G forces. Did I totally miss that on here?


Website | Flickr | Instagram | YouTube | Twitter | Facebook

Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 5:18 PM

If they implied that G-forces were too high, that would directly induce the question of whether it was safe while being operated. G-Forces are forces exerted on the rider, and the rider is the general public. They cannot incriminate themselves here. This reminds me very much the same at how the Maverick track replacement went down, where Cedar Point said that the trains were the problem through that 360 degree roll. They were not about to suggest that humans could not withstand the forces of the layout in that particular section of ride for the obvious reason to make people have the outlook that the rides are safe.

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 5:23 PM
delan's avatar

ApolloAndy said:
They should just stick in a giant top hat for the turnaround. ;)

I love it! Then Lord Gonchar would no longer have to complain about the ride only going "back and forth"

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 5:39 PM
ApolloAndy's avatar

^^ I agree, but I also know that other rides have similar forces and similar blacking out issues (the Gio hypers for instance) and have not needed modification (though the MCBR basically stop the train now).


Hobbes: "What's the point of attaching a number to everything you do?"
Calvin: "If your numbers go up, it means you're having more fun."

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 5:49 PM
DantheCoasterman's avatar

Wasn't I305 a walk-on throughout much of the summer months...even when only running one train?

That seems to be enough evidence to show that the GP aren't interested in (re)riding.


-Daniel

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 5:52 PM

Good question Dan.


Fever I really enjoy the Simpsons. It's just a shame that I am starting to LOOK like Homer.
+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 6:11 PM

xX eNeRtIa Xx said:
If they implied that G-forces were too high, that would directly induce the question of whether it was safe while being operated. G-Forces are forces exerted on the rider, and the rider is the general public. They cannot incriminate themselves here. This reminds me very much the same at how the Maverick track replacement went down, where Cedar Point said that the trains were the problem through that 360 degree roll. They were not about to suggest that humans could not withstand the forces of the layout in that particular section of ride for the obvious reason to make people have the outlook that the rides are safe.

How would that make the GP feel any better? So basically CP said that sure you will be perfectly safe from blacking out during that high g-force turn, but its too much stress on the trains and they might fall in half. I'm not saying that this is why CP removed that part of track. I'm just saying that this is the way people could interpret "Trains were the problem".

And Yes Dan, TR after TR that I read on here suggested that this ride had an incredibly short wait...including my own in which I was there on a saturday in mid august and we had to wait 5 minutes for any seat other than the front....and this was after they changed the restraints.


1.SV 2.El Toro 3.MF 4.I-305 5.Kumba
6.STR@SFNE 7.Voyage 8.X2 9.Storm Chaser 10. Wicked Cyclone

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 6:30 PM
Lord Gonchar's avatar

delan said:
I love it! Then Lord Gonchar would no longer have to complain about the ride only going "back and forth"

It'd take more than a top hat to fix one of the most uninspired coaster layouts ever.

Still not sure how the three things Intamin does best (overbanks, floaty inversions and sick, hard airtime hills) failed to make it into this snoozefest.

It really is the love child of MF and Maverick - if you take the most uninteresting and boring parts of each.

(I305 is my new Nitro - any chance to point out the "meh" is taken advantage of)


+0
Thursday, November 4, 2010 11:11 PM

I'm pretty excited about these changes.

i305 v1.0 was the most awesome intense thing I have ever ridden / done. The sustained G's and speed made skydiving look like child's play... honestly.

i305 v2.0 was the most disappointing awkward ride ever. The trims keep you in the g-haze longer, the airtime hill no longer pulled you out of it (no airtime to reverse the positive g's), and the rest of the ride (sans the part originally post-brakes) was too slow and it ruined the twisties.

Hopefully v3.0 will regain the high speeds with a wider turn and leftward twist up into the airtime hill (why I think they removed the first half of it....) without ruining the 2nd half of the ride. The twisties are meant to be hit at over 90mph - they ROCKED that way.

+0
Friday, November 5, 2010 8:42 AM
Vater's avatar

Lord Gonchar said:
I305 is my new Nitro

Well, if history repeats, maybe you'll like I305 in a few years. :)

You did ride pre-first drop trims, right?

+0
Friday, November 5, 2010 10:40 AM
eightdotthree's avatar

A re-profiled turn may not affect the speed, but it would change the forces on the wheels when going around the turn.


+0
Friday, November 5, 2010 10:52 AM
Tekwardo's avatar

I fail to see multiple TRs where there were no waits, in fact, the ones I looked at didn't even mention it, but I can say that I've read TRs elsewhere (TPR, CarowindsConnection, RRC, etc.) that never mentioned that people weren't riding it, or mentioned a lack of line.

Besides, Intimidator at Carowinds has been a hit, but when running well didn't have an incredibly long line all summer, save for July 4 and SCarowinds.

G-Forces are forces exerted on the rider, and the rider is the general public.

G-Forces are exerted on the entire train, not just the rider. When they re-did Maverick, they did that before the ride opened. If it was an issue with forces, they fixed that before anyone even rode it. I305 was tested with insturments and people before opening to the public. If it were an issue, they wouldn't have opened it.

I've only seen enthusiast speculation that the forces were a problem with people. I've seen/heard more credible evidence that the wheels are a problem. I still haven't seen anything convincing that says otherwise, but I'm open to real info.


Website | Flickr | Instagram | YouTube | Twitter | Facebook

Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.

+0
Friday, November 5, 2010 11:37 AM
Lord Gonchar's avatar

Vater said:
You did ride pre-first drop trims, right?

No. I think I got the ride at its worst; post-trim & pre-restraint change.


+0
Friday, November 5, 2010 11:46 AM
rollergator's avatar

^Not sure about that....tend to think that the extra speed was nice for the drop, turn, and first hill - but after that, 50mph would have been too fast for those horrid restraints. The track twists were just WAY too sudden for anything being positioned over/around my head, neck, and ears. Really would LOVE to try it with the new restraints (even moreso if it comes with a layout that allows for full-speed operation to resume).


You still have Zoidberg.... You ALL have Zoidberg! (V) (;,,;) (V)

+0
Friday, November 5, 2010 11:46 AM

Oh god Gonch... that was an awful time. While I would argue that the new restraints remove all airtime whatsoever for taller people (my shoulders are now pressed down by the cloth where they were totally free before) they definitely solve the headbanging issue.

Original i305 was a piece of perfection with forces and speeds so high that it was an athletic experience almost. With the new restraints there would be no risk of head bashing in the twisties at 90+mph which would be a huge advantage over v1.0. Like I said, skydiving had NOTHING on the layout of 305 before it hit those mid-course trims... it was a brain-f*** of massive proportions.

I agree with others stating that the forces on riders are not the reason for this change as there would have been pre-ride testing to prevent that. This is all about the wheels as evidenced by the sprayers and differing wheel compounds we have seen.

ANYTHING they do would be better than i305 v2.0. The lower speeds of 2.0 made the first hill boring, the first turn drag out into an even longer g-haze, the airtime hill a snooze-fest, and the twisties an awkward taken-too-slow-to-be-really-fun experience.

Intamin knew what they were doing when they designed the original with all of its forces they just didn't know that the wheels wouldn't like being put under 4-5 g's for huge long periods of time at speeds topping 90mph.... now they do. (Formula Rossa is running about 20-30 mph slower than designed right now because of the same issue)

Last edited by RollrCoastrCrazy, Friday, November 5, 2010 11:49 AM
+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2021, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...