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

Posted Wednesday, May 27, 2015 10:37 AM | Contributed by Jeff

From the park's description: "Sink your teeth into SeaWorld’s unrivaled new coaster, Mako. Arriving summer 2016, this 200-foot hypercoaster soars to the top of the food chain as Orlando’s tallest, longest and fastest coaster. Scream through the deep dives with unmatched speed and predator power. Fly through the air with the grace and agility of the ocean’s apex predator."

For more information, visit the official SeaWorld site.

Related parks

Wednesday, May 27, 2015 10:03 PM
rollergator's avatar

CarolinaNick15 said:

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

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

Last edited by rollergator, Wednesday, May 27, 2015 10:05 PM

You still have Zoidberg.... You ALL have Zoidberg! (V) (;,,;) (V)

+1Loading
Wednesday, May 27, 2015 10:16 PM

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.

+0
Wednesday, May 27, 2015 10:18 PM
CarolinaNick15's avatar

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.

+0
Thursday, May 28, 2015 2:31 AM

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

Last edited by GDdashROM, Thursday, May 28, 2015 2:32 AM
+1Loading
Thursday, May 28, 2015 8:18 AM
Raven-Phile's avatar

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


R.I.P LeRoi Moore 9/7/61 - 8/19/2008
+5Loading
Thursday, May 28, 2015 9:19 AM
koolcat1101's avatar

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


(Insert funny signature here.)

+0
Thursday, May 28, 2015 9:55 AM
ApolloAndy's avatar

That first turn to the left looks mighty overbanked.


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."

+2Loading
Thursday, May 28, 2015 9:58 AM
delan's avatar

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 :/

+0
Thursday, May 28, 2015 10:42 AM
Jeff's avatar

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.


Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog - Silly Nonsense

+2Loading
Thursday, May 28, 2015 12:30 PM
rollergator's avatar

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

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


You still have Zoidberg.... You ALL have Zoidberg! (V) (;,,;) (V)

+0
Thursday, May 28, 2015 8:04 PM
CarolinaNick15's avatar

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.

+0
Friday, May 29, 2015 2:41 PM
Kick The Sky's avatar

I think he would have approved of this ride ;)


Certain victory.

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2021, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...