Kinzel hints at 2011 ride in Sandusky Register

But is the reason that it bumps the side walls frequently an example of being a poorly maintained flume, or rather a poorly designed one?

I was on Log Jammer last week, and though I did notice some of the bumping you mention, it didn't seem uncomfortable at all. And I didn't observe jackhammering on the last drop.

I'm not sure I get why we have to know why Cedar Point removed WWL.

Ensign Smith said:
Mamoosh, why should they, if they're still popular? I see no evidence that the GP is abandoning them in droves.

Let's use an analogy: let's say your friends, family, and neighbors really love the car you drive. You've owned it for 20+ years and keeping it running is a drain on your finances. Do you get a new car? Or do you continue to pump money into the old one merely because it's popular?

Bad analogy. Hundreds of thousands of people aren't waiting in line to take a spin in my Yugo.

Converse analogy. Let's say you have a wooden roller coaster. It's so old, it's downright historic. It's not very tall, and it's not very fast, and it sure requires its share of retracking during the off-seasons. But people still seem to love it enormously. Do you yank it out and stick in a Mack mouse?

I'm not sold on the 'mounting maintenance' argument either. Just like any other ride, at some point it's necessary to begin replacing troughs. So what? As ride structure is replaced, maintenance costs ought to head back down, logically.

Well, maintenance costs are dictated in part by volume. That is, it's more economical to maintain a fiberglass flume if there are hundreds in a given region. If there are only a few, the maintenance becomes more of a specialty item, and costs increase.

And really, I don't recall droves of people lining up to ride WWL in recent years, so I'm not convinced the cost-per-rider was anything short of astronomic.

Mamoosh said:
And those aging flumes aren't going to last forever. Just because those parks haven't removed them doesn't mean they won't eventually be removed.

Exactly what I meant with my tongue-in-cheek reply:

Lord Gonchar said:
Yeah, but so did CP right up until the end of the 2005 season. :)

Maybe I'm too subtle sometimes? ;)

And let me just repeat myself again (again):

"Because other parks do it" isn't a reason CP should've or could've kept WWL around.

Vater said:
I'm not sure I get why we have to know why Cedar Point removed WWL.

Right? It's their product, they owe no one anything. For whatever reason they decided it was best to get rid of WWL.

It'd be funny if the real reason really was "to spite traditionalists."

Ensign Smith said:
Mamoosh, why should they, if they're still popular? I see no evidence that the GP is abandoning them in droves.

If popularity were the only factor, then sure. But it's not. Hell, it's probably not even in the top five most important factors.

This seems to be a popular misconception with nostalgic types - that people rode it, so there's no reason for it to go away.

You aren't taking into account everything though. Marketing, return on investment for repair or replacing, the amount of people that the ride draws in. Also, will it be a better investment to buy a new version with the option of it lasting longer before you have to do major work to it, than to just keep repairing and sinking money into the old one.

Obviously, it wasn't up to CP's standards for WWL, so they replaced WWL with StR.

And lets be honest, rollercoasters are a huge draw for any park. But how many parks do you see with 17 different log flumes? So getting rid of one and replacing it with one is kind of a smart decision, I think.

Edit, this was in response to Ensign.

Ensign Smith said:
Bad analogy. Hundreds of thousands of people aren't waiting in line to take a spin in my Yugo.

Which is, unfortunately, the same fate that WWL suffered. I don't remember waiting any more than 5-10 minutes for it in recent years, and by recent, I mean at least 5 years before its removal.

Mamoosh said:

Let's use an analogy: let's say your friends, family, and neighbors really love the car you drive. You've owned it for 20+ years and keeping it running is a drain on your finances. Do you get a new car? Or do you continue to pump money into the old one merely because it's popular?

LOL, did you read my post from the previous page?

Seems like some of you must be driving around your first car from the 60s/70s and just shelling out exorbitant amounts of money every month or so in order to keep your "classic" car running in pristine condition...

And perhaps WWL is the Yugo, whereas a ride like Blue Streak is more of a classic Cadilliac.

I had a 1996 Geo Metro. I loved it. It was the first car I actually paid for, and was actually a step up from my first 2 vehicles. At some point, though, the motor went bad, and I had to replace it, which was costly. Even though the car was paid for, it got to the point where it was going to need a new transmission, on top of a bunch of other stuff, so instead of continuing to put money into it, even though it was paid for and I liked it, it was better for me to get a new vehicle under warranty, and pay a per monthly payment instead of sinking in $1000 here or $500 there or $300 here over the course of a year on the Metro. So I got something else that did the same thing, and now it's paid for, and when the maintenance starts to get too much, I'll replace it (kinda like CP replace their previous flume with WWL).

But perhaps I had a 2nd car that was a classic Cadilliac. It's paid for, and yeah, I would have to pay $1000 here or $500 there for maintenance, but I can take this classic Cadilliac out to shows or rent it out to people or enter it in competitions. People are more interested in the classic Caddy than they are the old Metro, so it makes sense, because I may get a return on investment in putting money into the Caddy.

CP, even though they'd likely paid off the debt they incurred for WWL, decided that they could buy a new product that for the majority of customers the same thing as WWL, is under warranty, is going to be cheaper per month to pay for than to have to have the big payments that creep up unexpectedly, and will hopefully last as long or longer than WWL.

But a ride like Blue Streak is able to contribute to their marketing of most coasters evar, has good capacity, and good return on investment. Like the Caddy, there is probably a market for spare parts for that, whereas at some point the Geo and WWL won't have as much available.

Ensign Smith said:
Converse analogy. Let's say you have a wooden roller coaster. It's so old, it's downright historic. It's not very tall, and it's not very fast, and it sure requires its share of retracking during the off-seasons. But people still seem to love it enormously. Do you yank it out and stick in a Mack mouse?

If keeping the coaster is such a drain on my maintenance budget that my park or rides suffer in some way, yes. It's gone...even for a Mack mouse.

I'm just not convinced that WWL was such a maintenance and budgetary nightmare. If that's the case with flumes, many of those other parks would have thrown in the towel years ago.

Ensign Smith said:
I'm just not convinced that WWL was such a maintenance and budgetary nightmare. If that's the case with flumes, many of those other parks would have thrown in the towel years ago.

Aww, you're killing me, man. I know you know better.

Let me say it for the third time:

"Because other parks do it" isn't a reason CP should've or could've kept WWL around.

There's a million factors in keeping, adding, removing or doing whatever to a ride.

Cost is just one. For CP that cost was more than they felt comfortable with given their own situation and the other factors at play.

Some other parks are ok with keeping the rides given their situations.

It's no more complicated than that.

Well, as a matter of fact, many other parks have gotten rid of theirs too. But, because Cedar Point is a focal point for many people, plus the title of the thread, that's who we're talking about. The number of "traditional" flumes is steadily getting smaller.

On a seperate note, one of my favorites is at Six Flags St. Louis.

I'm just not convinced that WWL was such a maintenance and budgetary nightmare.

It doesn't have to be a nightmare. In fact, the idea is to get rid of it before it becomes one. And loads of parks have gotten rid of theirs, while others haven't.

Also, just because other parks have them doesn't mean they have the same one with the same circumstances CP has. Not all flumes are the same.

As for SFStl's Flume, I wish I'd ridden it last month. I like fun flumes. My current favorite is Hershey's.

That's quite true. Not all flumes spend the winter on the shore of Lake Erie, buried under ice and snow. I'm sure that took a toll on WWL, for sure.

I can see both sides of the argument, I'm just not a fan of how that area of the park looks now more than anything, Maybe my opinion will change once all the trees grow in.

Lord Gonchar said:

Aww, you're killing me, man. I know you know better.

Let me say it for the third time:

"Because other parks do it" isn't a reason CP should've or could've kept WWL around.

I'm surprised you didn't figure out after some point that, in part, I was beginning to bait you, Gonch. ;)

But all kidding aside, I'm just not completely sold. The case for canning traditional flumes sounds a tad bit oversold, at best, to me. And I don't think it's just because I weally, weally like 'em.

Mike: Perhaps I didn't make my point clearly. Every point you disputed was in the context of a shrinking off-season and a ballooning overall maintenance budget. If you have less time to maintain rides, and more of them to maintain with essentially flat revenue, something has to give. The low hanging fruit immediately becomes a ride that needs a ton of work and already has a high cost-per-ride price to it (something I know CP keeps track of).

Trust me, these kinds of decisions at CP are largely number-driven. Whether it was WWL or another ride, it doesn't matter... it was the cost. It's the same thing that forced Schwabinchen into retirement, and why they'd sooner get rid of Chaos and not the Scrambler.

Gosh, Jeff...if I didn't know better I'd think you make running an amusement park sound like a business.