Screamin' Swing at the point next year?

Friday, June 17, 2005 12:15 PM
Taken From Screamscape:

First Drop magazine has reported that a giant sized 40 seat version of the S&S Screamin’ Swing may very well be on the way to Cedar Point for 2006.

Makes you wonder, with 2 flat rides and most likely some more family attractions next year-if the screamin' swing is coming- will CP push for 500ft in 2007? It seems as if that idea is starting to be pushed around more, personaly i sure hope not

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 12:18 PM
As for the Screamin' Swing, I think that would be a bad idea for the Point, considering the capacity and reliability issues exhibited with the version that opened in Europe this year.

As for the 500 footer, the only way to make a coaster like that, is for it to be a one-trick-pony. Considering that Cedar Point already has this one-trick-pony, unless they want to spend a HUGE amount of money to make a more lengthy coaster, I doubt that will be happening for a while.

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 12:43 PM
As for the 500 footer, MF was 25 mill to build and has some length to it. It could be that it would have a more traditional lift hill instead of a launch.
+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 1:18 PM
Rollrcoastercrazy has it right. IF (and thats a HUGE if) they or anyone would ever build 500 in the near future it would likely be a 1 trick pony. For no other reason than just cost. The higher you contruct the costs are almost exponential, right? A full circuit coaster twice as tall as MF would be likely more like $75-100 million, right? No one but Disney and Universal has that kind of $$ for rides.
+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 1:34 PM
ok i have to but in...people keep saying CP will build a 500 foot within the next few years. I say heck no they won't...or atleast they wont until they get all the problems fixed with the 400 footer they already have. Why in their right mind would they go higher when they cant even figure out why TTD keeps breaking, and looking at KK and all its problems so far this year, it may even push back their plans for a little longer. yes i know i never mentioned anything about the origional topic, but it's getting really rediculous of people saying "oh CP's gonna get a 500 footer." but just stop and think, if they cant keep one running that is 100 ft shorter, then why whould they try higher!
+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 1:38 PM

Peabody said:
A full circuit coaster twice as tall as MF would be likely more like $75-100 million, right? No one but Disney and Universal has that kind of $$ for rides.

Not only do they have the money, but their parks are some of the only ones that are open daily year round to recoup the investment.

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 2:04 PM
And they got tons of hotels, tons of full service restaurants, large capacity in the parks to also recuperate that investment. DCA is a "flop", but still get 5,5 millions guests a year. I know tons of parks that would like to be such a "flop".
+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 2:33 PM
I dont think we would see a trick pony, but if any park has the money to build a coaster this height, its CP. Also, i think it is getting pretty safe to say most-85%- of TTD kinks have been worked out, if this ride were at a SF park such as SFMM, it would be considered of having average down time.

I just dont see another mega coaster foucsing on height and speed coming to CP. However, if they do build a floorless i think it is very likely it will be a hyper. A flyer, eh ill see it pushes 160. Hopefully though we see a good woodie, and of course, i hope, that wont be anywhere near a hyper

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 2:35 PM
True Absmilliard,, but you have to remember over 2/3ds of DCA's visitors don't even pay admission. They are AP holders and people with park hoppers. Many people don't even spend a penny inside the gates. (They just duck over for an hour or 2 during a visit to the magic Kingdom) So as far as paying customers go, they are a termendous flop, and there are whispers that Disney is ready to make some drastic changes! *** Edited 6/17/2005 6:36:45 PM UTC by Peabody***
+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 2:39 PM
Well why bother with the 500 footer when they could just get the 700 foot tall Arrow fishhook coaster that was supposed to go to the Stratosphere? Hmmm..... LOL! Now that is some really wishful thinking!
+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 3:01 PM
True Peabody... but when I was there over the last 10 days, if DL didn't have DCA to absorb the extra crowds, they would probably have to close the gate each day! DL was so busy, just walking around was tough. DCA also had big crowds that just would have piled in DL.

Can't you say the same too of IOA? Since 2-3 years, Universal Studios has been selling "cheap" annual passes to both parks, giving you 3-5 days for the price of a 2 day park hoppers. Its only this year they started cracking down on the cheap annual pass. Its called the Power Pass and has blackout dates. Without warning, they switched the blackout dates from weekend only to weekdays, leaving only crowded weekends for the summer!

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 3:17 PM
"but just stop and think, if they cant keep one running that is 100 ft shorter, then why whould they try higher!"

Because if they used a traditional lift hill, the problems that they have for Dragster wouldn't be the same.

"A full circuit coaster twice as tall as MF would be likely more like $75-100 million, right?"

It wouldn't be twice as tall at 500ft. Anyway, MF and Dragster were $25 million each and a hundred feet separate them. I would think that figure would be more like $35-$40 mill., not $75-$100 mill., even though MF is 6,595ft. and Dragster is 2,800 ft. *** Edited 6/17/2005 7:18:04 PM UTC by Coasterbuzzer***

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 3:34 PM
Just a thought. How about something similar to the screaming squirrel/Frequent Faller or a combination of this and a traditional coaster. Small footprint with lots of possiblities. Could easily be over 500 with elevator style lift hill. This is not a rumor just to show that 500 feet could happen with a little imagination and does not need to be a one-trick pony.

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 3:43 PM
I, for one, hope Kinzel chooses something more creative for his swan song than a 500' coaster.
+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 4:04 PM
wahoo skipper said:
I, for one, hope Kinzel chooses something more creative for his swan song than a 500' coaster.

So Kinzel will finally give the Dippin Dots and Lemonade Stand guy the coaster they always talk about rumors of right Wahoo.

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 4:11 PM

Coasterbuzzer said:It wouldn't be twice as tall at 500ft. Anyway, MF and Dragster were $25 million each and a hundred feet separate them. I would think that figure would be more like $35-$40 mill., not $75-$100 mill., even though MF is 6,595ft. and Dragster is 2,800 ft. *** Edited 6/17/2005 7:18:04 PM UTC by Coasterbuzzer***

No, a 500ft full circuit coaster (non-rocket) would be way more than twice as expensive as MF. Construction costs for structures do not go up proportionally with height.

A 500 foot rocket would maybe be in that 35-40 mil range, but we all know CP's not going to build a rocket.

And I agree with the above...I hope Kinsel does something more creative than a 500ft. coaster. But, I doubt we have anything to worry about.

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 4:17 PM
^Well, it has to be proportional to something. Here you have two coasters only a hundred and ten feet taller than another and they cost relatively the same. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I want to see where a 500 ft. structure is more than double the cost of a 400 ft. one.
+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 4:26 PM
Wouldn't a 40 seat Screamin’ Swing be about the same ride as Maxair?...minus the rotation... I'd rather see another Huss Giant.

Jump2 anyone??

*** Edited 6/17/2005 8:27:25 PM UTC by Stanley76*** *** Edited 6/17/2005 8:29:12 PM UTC by Stanley76***

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 4:27 PM
I agree with Peabody. A 500 ft. traditional lifthill coaster will cost considerably more than a 500 ft. rocket.

Coasterbuzzer, look at all the additional supports needed for MF compaired to TTD. A 500 ft. lifthill coaster would have to have one hell of a layout to make it worth building the lifthill. That means a lot more ground work and a lot more supports and track. What does that equal? $$$$

Rockets are relatively cheaper than their traditional lifthill counterparts because they do away with all of the structure needed to support a long lift.

+0
Friday, June 17, 2005 4:34 PM
I'm not saying that it wouldn't cost more, I just want to see some statistics that says it will be more than double. I'm NOT saying it's not true, I'm just having a hard time swallowing that one. For all we know, it could already be in the works. Then again, maybe it's not. Although, now looking at the cost difference between Magnum and Millie is considerable...$8 mill compared to 25 mill, it's possible, other than you have to factor in the relative construction costs at the times the two were built. Or, is a lot of the extra cost with the cable lift?
+0

You must be logged in to post

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