If you had to remove one ride from your home park-- Which one would it be?

Sunday, March 11, 2007 8:18 AM
Every so often, parks have to take a ride out. The may want to replace it with something newer. Often an existing ride may be a maintainence nightmare, it may suffer from low ridership or capacity, or it is just a bad ride.

If you were forced to decide which ride (suitable for adults) had to be removed from your home park (presumably to make room for another ride), which one would you choose to let go?

+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 9:58 AM
Steel Venom.
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 10:09 AM
joker's jinx (sfa).

terrible

+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 10:49 AM
Wyandot Lake took out just about everything.
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 10:49 AM
GL's Grizzly Run - sorry excuse for a river rapids ride.
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 10:54 AM
KW is a dilemma regarding this question because there are no really "bad" rides in the park. I would need to look at other factors. Pittsburg Plunge has relatively low ridership for a ride with its capacity and it is a very short ride but it has atmosphere and also soaks the onlookers that stand in certain places. The Paratrooper has low capacity but it is a good ride that is both a thrill ride and family friendly. It also fits in well with its surroundings. The Turtle isn't overly exciting (CLPs Bug is better) but this ride reeks with nostalgia which is much of the essence of KW.

I really can't make a call on KW regarding this. The Flying Carpet (which was becoming a maintainence headache) is now gone. That would have been my pick as of the end of last season but only because it wasn't running often if at all. With it gone, this really is a tough choice to make.

+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 12:12 PM
I would look formulate between each attractions ridership, taken from the turnstiles, and the actual capacity of each ride, and decide which ride to take out by figuring out which ride was least popular.

Sorry for being a killjoy.

+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 12:46 PM
Disaster Transport. While ridership is high, it's an embarassment to Cedar Point, with theming literally left to sit and rot year after year. It would be great (especially considering its location), to see a nice mid-size family-friendly custom woodie put in.

But I digress....Kinzel is still in charge.

+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 12:48 PM
Had to? Try "wanted to". I already DID this. Python is gone now. ;)
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 1:30 PM
You say that like you were the one driving the bulldozer ;)

*** Edited 3/11/2007 5:31:02 PM UTC by ApolloAndy***

+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 2:01 PM
Oh Yes -- regarding KW, it has to be Kenny's Parkway. Why did they build a transport ride between the most remote parking lot and the gate that doesn't operate on many days? Not only that, it causes some people to pass up the preferred $5 parking on busy days so that they can ride it. Instead of this, why not have such a ride inside the park itself and make the second lot "pay" parking on busier days? Then more would use the upper lot even if it is a bit less convenient to get to the entrance from it. *** Edited 3/11/2007 6:02:12 PM UTC by Arthur Bahl***
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 2:05 PM
For ValleyFair! it would be Corkscrew. Nothing but a migraine waiting to happen.
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 3:20 PM
Even though it has some significance as far as a prototype B & M stand-up I could certainly do without Iron Wolf at SFGAm. It's just too hard to have fun on it anymore.
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:07 PM
I second Iron Wolf. That ride has turned to crap.
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:22 PM
Kings Island, Id remove IJST and Install a ten tub flying scooter :)
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:24 PM
Someone bump Chuck's needle...he's skipping again.
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:49 PM
Adventureland's Dragon.
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 5:12 PM
When you take a ride out, you have to look at what you can replace it with. An unpopular ride with a big footprint such as an outmoded coaster has to be a prime candidate for removal. On the other hand, a flat that doesn't take up much space but suffers from low capacity might be still worth keeping.

Sometimes a ride with relatively low ridership might be worth keeping because it is different from other rides in the park. Such a ride might attract some visitors to the park who like that type of ride and would go elsewhere if the park didn't have it. An example is Zoomerang at LC. Some visitors to LC who enjoy loopong coasters might be more inclined to go to SFNE instead if that ride weren't there. *** Edited 3/11/2007 9:28:13 PM UTC by Arthur Bahl***

+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 5:43 PM
Rolling Thunder/Rotting Lumber at Six Flags Great Adventure. Put a better woodie in there, a family dueling or mid-size dueling woodie in there perhaps? That would be much better!
+0
Sunday, March 11, 2007 5:59 PM
Kings Island is a bit interesting, but I would remove the go karts and put in a flat ride or restaraunt. Actually I don't think a flying scooters would be ideal in that action zone spot, however they could put one in coney mall, or also the paramount story area by the grand carousel. Actually i think italian job was a much needed coaster in that its age and appeal are what the park needed. Its placement however was poor, in that they could have just placed it where firehawk is now. That way they would not have to removed two rides, and it would just be in an open flat section of the park where nothing was before.
+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...