SLC's roughness

I have only ridden Kong and ST (SFWoA), so I have a limited experience with them, but I found that the restraints are the difference. ST's have a lot of extra actual cushioned padding which makes the impacts easier to handle, whereas Kong was just hard plastic and was brutal (what's with SFMW and brutal coasters? I swear you San Franciscans can put up with a *lot* of pain!). I think the layout is great, and since its been cloned so many times, its a great way for a mid-major park to get a star attraction for not as much money, but I think if they pulled the restraints back some (pulling some info from ausiman's post) a-la B&M so your head could just move and not bang, they'd be a lot more enjoyable rides.

Still, the public eats them up, regardless of the banging - case in point, my SFMW day, Kong was a 35 minute wait, nothing else was over 10 (and not just cause of low capacity or operations problems, just a lot of people). Similar last Monday at SFWoA - I just sat on S:UE cause there was no one in line, but the ST station was 1/2 to 3/4 full the entire 3 1/2 hours I was there.

------------------
Formerly PittDesigner (graduating soon!)
Lifelong fan of all Impulses!
--Brett

I haven't ridden Serial Thriller in the last couple of years. Shame too because it's at my home park and I'm usually there every week riding the other coasters. I think I'll give It another spin this week and see how it goes. I do remember hearing comparisons about ST to Raptor from the GP when the ride was new. I remember hearing a lot of people saying they liked it better than its B&M counterpart in Sandusky. Like you said, Kick The Sky, the layout is nonstop as far as the different elements go with no blocking area to ruin the pacing of the ride. I'll try it in different seats to get a true perspective of smoothness. I don't want to hate the rides, just enjoy them.

Wood - anything else is just an imitation
*** This post was edited by Thrillerman 7/11/2003 10:59:55 AM ***

Yeah, the head restraints aren't all granite anymore. T2's is pretty cushy. Good thing, too.

Every time the spring-loaded-wheels vs design-of-transitions discussion comes up in relation to roughness, I keep thinking about Phantom's Revenge... Arrow non-spring-loaded wheels on mostly Morgan track. There's one slightly rough transition in the old Arrow track (top of the 2nd hill before the ravine drop) but the rest of the ride is very smooth... without spring-loaded wheels. I've heard the same said for Tennessee Tornado for pretty much the same reason -- the well-designed transitions in the track contributes more to the smoothness of the ride than the wheels.

Which is weird, because T2's problems seem to be all in the wheels... or the trains in general. SLC transitions are pretty smooth.

Bottom line is I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all answer to this. It's always a combination of factors, track, wheels, park maintenance, weather, phase of the moon, color of the rider's shoes, who knows... :)

I agree... the SLC's seem to have reasonably smooth transitions, despite the fact that the layout is quite compact. I'm with those who believe that the wheel assemblies are to blame for much of the supposed "roughness"... it is true that you can hear and feel the jolt that occurs when one set of wheels comes back in contact with the track during some of the inversion elements. With that being said, I think that a big problem is the fact that the trains are much "higher" than those on sit-down coasters, such as a Vekoma Boomerang. When you have a sit-down train, the train's mass is very close to the wheel assemblies and the track... with an inverted design, the train has much more vertical height because there has to be enough clearance for riders beneath the track, and that change in the center of gravity probably intensifies any kind of jolt that the train makes as it navigates the track. And going back to the wheel assembly topic again, B&M's spring-loaded assemblies seem to rectify this issue.

Moosh- I agree that the Great Nor'easter is the best of the SLC's (at least as far as I'm concerned- I have experience with them that is somewhat limited in comparison to others). The smoothness, the setting (looking out over the expanse of the Atlantic as you climb the lift hill with the beach sand beneath you) and the intertwining of water slides and a log flume all make for a Vekoma that I would be as willing to ride as any B&M invert!

------------------
-Rob
A.C.E. member since 1990
Posting @ Coasterbuzz since 2000
E.C.C. member since 2002

I have only been on one SLC, but it is fine until the inline twists at the end.

I think maintance is the biggest problem with rough SLC's.

------------------
"Here's my ten cence, my two cence is free"-Eminem

I don't find the inlines to be much of a problem,for me it's that dang sidwinder element that's really the only rough spot on the ride.

On the issue of the wheel assemblies,I don't think the issue is entirely with the gaps between the rails & the guide wheels,just look at how rough SFA's S:ROS has gotten lately & that's an intamin.

With regard to the wheels you'd figure the positive G's & weight of the train just by nature of it's suspended postion would prevent it from sliding across the rails,so the gaps between the guide wheels & the rails wouldn't be much of a concern.

What would really make the ride smooth is if vekoma would design a new wheel mount based on their invertigo chassis,that design seems to allow for more flexibility when going through tight curves or transitions & the seats are even using the exact same restraint as the SLC's right down to the oversized ear padding!,but yet it doesn't bang you around nearly half as much as if they were to have used a traditional SLC wheel mount.

I didn't know that Invertigos and SLCs used different wheel mounts... are you sure the differences in ride quality aren't because the Invertigo is a lot less twisted than the SLC layout? I could be wrong, but I thought that they were the same.

------------------
-Rob
A.C.E. member since 1990
Posting @ Coasterbuzz since 2000
E.C.C. member since 2002

If you take a close look at the wheel mounts you'll definitely notice the difference in appearance between the two designs.

It may also have to do with the way the seats are mounted as well,as mentioned above the SLC's use a simple verticle post & the braces that stick out at an angle,the invertigo however has the seats mounted on a block which runs the entire width of the train just below the wheel mounts making for a much more stable ride,although with all the extra fiberglass paneling on the sides it's hard to tell if it is in fact just mounted using the same system as the SLC's.

Perhaps the framework on the cars is stiffer because of the four seats being mounted together to the same chassis (on the Invertigo models)?

------------------
-Rob
A.C.E. member since 1990
Posting @ Coasterbuzz since 2000
E.C.C. member since 2002

The new head pads on Mind Eraser at SFA are a vast improvement. I suspect that they are the same that pads that people have mentioned as an improvement on other SLCs.

Of course, if SLCs didn't have OTSRs, we wouldn't have any complaints about roughness.

I guess my "going on and on" about how the soft fluffy padding makes a big difference wasn't ALL in vain, eh.....;)

I was just on Serial Thriller 5 times tonight at SFWoA and had 5 excellent rides. I have no complaints, and dont' know why so many people don't like the SLC's. The Mind Eraser at SFDL was a little rough, but ST is great! Go Vekoma!

SLC's are junk. I've never liked any of the ones I've been on. Tear them down and sell the scrap to the junk yard.

------------------
YOUNGSTOWN 2010