SeaWorld Orlando announces Mako, the tallest and fastest roller coaster in Orlando

CarolinaNick15 said:

...like Goliath at SFoG...(snipped - ed.)...what Florida needs.

What I've been saying for years! ;-)

I find it somewhat interesting that, assuming the renderings are accurate, it will only have 7 rows per train. All of the other B&M hypercoasters (less than 300ft) with this style train have 9 rows. Maybe the shorter trains will allow them the make the transitions a little more snappy than usual.

I haven't ever seen a B&M hyper with overbanks like this one. Mako now that I look at it more closely looks like a combo of a typical B&M hyper like Behemoth or Nitro, with the height, airtime, and hammerhead turnaround, with a taste of Fury, with the first high banked curve right after the drop and the twister section after the MCBR that reminds me of the low to the ground overbanks on Fury. The color scheme is cool too, and in no universe does it look too short to me. The trains are cool with the shark on the front. I'm just wondering why they didn't do with the newer stadium style seating trains, like on Intimidator, Shambhala, etc. Whatever. Probably lighter trains are more rapid through turns, so that could very much be it, just like on Fury.

This article seems to have a rendering of what it'll look like: http://www.mynews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/on-the-town/article.h...aster.html

I'm so glad they went with the 4-across seating. I hate those stupid triangle trains.

I seems like Orlando is finnally opening more thrill coasters. If the Skyscraper coaster works out I'll head down there again in 2017.

That first turn to the left looks mighty overbanked.

ApolloAndy said:

Obviously I make the disclaimer that I haven't ridden it, etc. etc. but just to speculate because otherwise we wouldn't have anything to talk about:
Why have an MCBR at all? If my memory of Sea World serves me, their operations are not that great and with a relatively short track, wouldn't it make more sense to go with 2 trains and no MCBR? I also happen to think that B&M MCBR's tend to kill the pacing of their respective rides but even just in terms of maintenance, running 2 trains is better than running 3. What's the upside to having an MCBR?

I agree. I have never seen Manta run more than two trains. Same with Kraken. Granted, they are really good about turning off the trims when they only run two trains - but why spend the money on the extra parts :/

I think what you're seeing is the disconnect between the design people and the operations people, the latter of which I don't think are very good compared to their contemporaries at every company other than Six Flags.

Still wishing it had been a Mack-o hyper...

...not that there's anything wrong with B&M...

delan said:

ApolloAndy said:

Obviously I make the disclaimer that I haven't ridden it, etc. etc. but just to speculate because otherwise we wouldn't have anything to talk about:
Why have an MCBR at all? If my memory of Sea World serves me, their operations are not that great and with a relatively short track, wouldn't it make more sense to go with 2 trains and no MCBR? I also happen to think that B&M MCBR's tend to kill the pacing of their respective rides but even just in terms of maintenance, running 2 trains is better than running 3. What's the upside to having an MCBR?

I agree. I have never seen Manta run more than two trains. Same with Kraken. Granted, they are really good about turning off the trims when they only run two trains - but why spend the money on the extra parts :/

Kraken never runs more than two trains, but when I was at there, Manta was running great operations with 3 trains every time I went since I had the fun card. I agree though that Kraken has painful operations.

I think he would have approved of this ride ;)