If the lift hill was 13 feet higher, they would find something else to complain about. Some people aren't happy unless they're looking for a reason to be unhappy or disappointed.
Agreed. I don't know how you can be disappointed if you remember that this is the replacement for Firehawk. People who are unhappy should be forced to sit in the Vekoma flyer trains for 30 minutes as punishment.
Coasterbuzz - Coaster enthusiasts, but so much more. We're the good ones.
So I begrudgingly replied to one negative-Nelly thread by simply saying, "Remind me, how many records did Mystic Timbers break?"
Of course, in an effort to gently remind folks that breaking records does not equal greatness. And guess what happened? "But dude, Mystic Timbers sucks, blah blah blah".
Put it this way; if there is any fan-base on the planet that should understand that breaking records does not mean better (cough cough SOB), it should be Kings Island.
Promoter of fog.
I’ve looked back through for previous comments of mine, but maybe I’ll just repeat myself.
I get the disappointment some may feel. Yes, it would be awesome if everyone could get excited about a 350 footer that would break all kinds of records. And given the fact that it is Kings Island and that CF parks in general are proud (or eager you might say) to make those kind of claims, it’s understandable that hopes ran high. But that’s just not the case here, so a look on the bright side is in order.
Its blue. Its gorgeous. It’s a nice long drop. It’s super fast. (Which I believe is the main reason that some perceive the ride to be “short” in length) It’s a B&M and two of the handoffs there are reliability and throughput.
Everything, everywhere can always be better, right? But in this case there’s a lot to be happy about. I’m very much looking forward to giving this ride a try.
Time for another dumb Dale's logic concerning lift hill heights.
If I were to build a coaster with a 10 foot lift hill and have it go down into the Grand Canyon (5000 feet or so) is that considered a kiddie coaster? Now reverse that and start at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, is that (insert name of 5000 foot tall lift hill here) coaster with only a 10 foot drop? I consider the drop to to be the defining height.
At the moment no, steel prices are pretty low. But that is only part of the equation. Take B&M, they purchases the steel from a US producer. If they made the purchase today, it would me a much discounted rate than compared to a year ago. While the actual cost to build the ride would technically be less today, I am not certain if this price difference would be passed onto the company buying the coaster. If you look at cars, rarely would this savings be passed onto the consumer.
^But, are US steel prices higher due to higher demand?
There is no such thing as a terrible Coaster just ones that haven't been taken care of
Maybe the rendering is playing tricks on my brain, but this feels a little more hill-centric then the recent B& M speed coasters?
Laterals which aren't really my bag anyway, appear a bit more minimized and condensed to that pretty unique looking helix at the end.
Terrain driven. Sexy color. I'm sold. Especially since my first time at PKI in 5 years this summer yielded both a closed Beast and a closed Mystic Timbers! Better luck next year.
I think most of the disappointment comes from the fact that KI sits on top of a valley, and they could have used that Valley to build the most unique coaster. But instead chose the most uninspired out and back layout of any giga out there.
Ki already has 3 out and backish coasters. Now 4.
Its worth noting that everything about this coaster was already leaked on the internet including the name The only slight surprise last night with the announcement was Area 72 name
Ki already has 3 out and backish coasters. Now 4.
I'm sure management is really scared to death of the 1000 or so of the 3 and a half million people that visit each year that will realize that. People incapable of having fun that worry about a 90 mph 300 foot drop being uninspired are a pretty important demographic.
Kstr 737 said:
Shouldn't we be b*tchin' about the Cedar Point announcement?
No. Most of us aren’t that entitled.
Say what you want about the ride, I personally am in the "meh" category that called this as soon as the plans leaked and the NoLimits renders started appearing in May, but THANK YOU Jeff for letting people at least speak their mind on this forum. If you so much as utter one critique of the ride over on the cursed forum their dictator bans you and the regular commenters all pile on.
How dare anyone have a legitimate critique about a ride!!! King's Island has been down the road from a (real) giga since 2019 ... it's completely understandable that some KI fans might have been hoping for a more satisfying layout. This is a massive investment and basically means the park won't be getting another coaster for some good amount of time.
It will be a fun ride, but to ban anyone that critiques it is nuts.
...THANK YOU Jeff for letting people at least speak their mind on this forum. If you so much as utter one critique of the ride over on the cursed forum their dictator bans you and the regular commenters all pile on.
To be clear, we don't ban anyone, we just say your opinion is stupid. Then pile on. 😁
I fully understand banning hateful / repeatedly annoying people... but something like "I think they could have done more with the layout" is hardly slamming / hating the ride. If you can't even have a realistic criticism what's the point of a discussion board imo.
I don't think MilF is a perfect ride either, but I still love it dearly.
Regarding the Cedar Point announcement (or lack thereof), I'm curious as to what this will be...
All we know via Tony is that it will be in the same waters (so, the river)...but a "completely different experience" from Paddlewheel.
Whatever it is I'm sure it will suck. Via Facebook.
Promoter of fog.
How much of that track length in the brakes, tho?
For real though, I am in the elitist, happy-to-be-unhappy camp. I'm sure it will be a great ride in the big scheme of things, but I just don't get the layout. I suspect it will ride a lot like Leviathan which I liked but didn't love: fast and graceful, but not especially intense or unique. I liked Behemoth more because it did more, though I appear to be in the minority. My experience of a 200' hill taken at 80 MPH feels almost identical to a 100' hill taken at 50 MPH (numbers approximate) and Behemoth had a lot more 100' hills.
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."
We just returned from a trip to Canada's Wonderland and also preferred Behemoth over Leviathan (this includes my three boys 8 - 13). Both had amazing first drops, but Behemoth was able to do a bit more.
I think the biggest disappointment is that we've seen what was able to be done with Fury. It's a very interesting layout that gives you the feeling of balls to the wall speed with low sections of track and quick directional changes. And this was done on a flat piece of land with zero trees.
I hope they manage to keep it running better than Diamondback. That ride has a nasty rattle that really ruins it for me. Also, it starts out really good in the airtime department but once the trims kick in ahead of the midcourse it’s over.
Only had a sample size of one ride this year, but I had a shaky ride on Banshee too. I’ve never been a huge fan of the ride (the sustained g’s are too high for my liking) but until now I could say it was smooth.
You must be logged in to post