Timberliner Testing resumes on the Voyage

^There have to be joints built into the cars, or they will crack. There was a John Allen interview from the early 80's where he went into how much flex (in inches, I believe) each car needs to have for a certain amount of transition to banking, etc. Pretty geeky but cool stuff!

I've felt flexing and moving seats/lap bars (buzz bars ;) ) on many a 3 bench PTC. One thing I am thinking of now is how the change to the 2 bench trains facilitated faster, wilder rides. Those old 3 bench trains simply wouldn't work well at those speeds - with bumps, etc. American Eagle still has 3 bench PTC - but I call them *Frankenstein* cars. They have all kinds of little modifications/stiffeners in/on them. They also have ratchet bars (custom, similar to Viper at the same park) that do NOT fall down.

You can see and feel the cars twist and hear wood rubbing as you go up the lift on Comet at Hershey. Scares the crap out of me.

I would probably argue that all of the flexing and twisting is a design flaw, or at the very least, a relic of engineering that's decades old. It implies all kinds of things that are wrong with "classic" wood coaster engineering, especially the part about not being able to steer properly. It also means more loss of energy, which in a lot of cases (I'm looking at you, Mean Streak) doesn't help when a train can't have enough outward force to keep from bouncing off the outside guide rail.

^So, are the ball and socket joint built in to B&M coasters (which are also movable joints) a design flaw?

I don't think he meant the cars twisting relative to each other but the cars themselves twisting.

..and yes, it always wigs me out too.

^Exactly what I meant too, Gonch ;)

Right. I'm pretty much with you, Jeff...Gonch is right, CoasterDemon, the fact that the PTC train is built without functioning joints and relies on the ability of the car to flex is what Jeff is talking about. The B&M coaster chassis is rigid, with flexibility built in between cars and into axle assemblies giving the train a formal means of conforming to the track, rather than just leaving everything loose and sloppy.

Thing is, John Allen had to design flexibility into his train chassis because he didn't build any articulation into it. PTC corrected some of that by adding the roll axis to the rear axle (and when you think about it, it DOES make sense that it is the REAR axle that can roll...) but very few 3-bench cars have that. I think the Viper and American Eagle are two exceptions that do. Allowing the back axle to pivot allows for a few inches (three degrees) of roll between the front and rear axle of each car before the car has to flex.

The other issue, of course, is the unbanked part of the curve. That's where the Timberliner, and most steel coasters, can steer around the corner the same way your automobile can (although it's more complicated because it's on rails). Conventional PTC style wood coaster trains steer more in the manner of a bulldozer. Which works, but it isn't the most efficient way to do it, and it tends to tear up the rides.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

^I get it now :) Plus, I was chalking it up (the twisting cars) to a bit of charm, something I like with the old woodies.

What I'm thinking of now is the Intamin V2 here at Great America - there are cracks in the hard foam seats - and when the train hits the pull outs, the back of my legs get pinched a bit.

The "design flaws" of classic wooden coaster engineering are an integral part of those rides' lasting appeal though. Just imagine putting Timberliners or Millennium Flyers on the Coney Island Cyclone. Even the GCI guys have recently gone on record stating that modern trains will ruin that ride if (if the city has its way).

Lasting appeal? I think that's an enthusiast position. John Q. Public friends and co-workers almost universally view wood coasters as "old" or "rough," and some even believe they're "unsafe." PTC's suck, and they're everywhere. I've always hated those trains.

AV, How can you ruin a almost un=ridable ride? The Charm is sitting in a old classic four bench. The pain comes from Under supported track and overweight cars. I planned on about five rides on my visit. I took two......... Been there, Done that. No desire to return in its current state.
Worse than any off my 350 SOB rides in jack hammering period.

I know there are lots of pics of the Timberliner Nose car that was at HWN. I need to looks at it to make a comparison but I could swear Mike said at the event the nose car was two bench with the rest being indivisual full articulating single axel cars. Unless as Rideman States they just wanted to place seats over the steer axle and did it with a singular two bench tub.

And Jeff, I agree with the PTC, Expecially the modified divider, high back ones. It still seems to me that the NAD's seemed to steer better. Whats strange about the Antiques is that the CURE or at least major improvement (Prior and Church) was found ALMOST 90 YEARS AGO. :) Your current GCII trains are darn near duplicates.

Chuck

Tell that to Kennywood, Jeff. Three classic woodies all approaching a century old and all using "flawed" trains. Yet the GP love those rides. It's not just enthusiasts that love wooden coasters. Otherwise they wouldn't keep building them, duh. I've heard random people at Great Adventure (even teenage girls) say they like Rolling Thunder better than El Toro because it's more like an old fashioned roller coaster (or something to that effect). Most enthusiasts would say that's blasphemy.

Chuck, not sure what you're talking about. I love riding the Cyclone. If you sit over an axel (like Clint did), it can be a bad experience (but some people still worship that--like Gator, but not Clint though). But move up one row and it's a crazy good ride that throws you around yet doesn't slam your spine into the seat. The track supports could definitely use work and that is being addressed, but the trains make that ride what it is. Just ask Mike Boodley and Clair Hain.

Kennywood isn't running PTC's.

Bazinga!

He didn't say they were running PTC's. I believe the point was that they are not runing MF's or Timberliners at Kennywood and GP still love their woodies.

What trains are running on KW's Racer?

You can't just selectively read one post out of context. Go back further. There was general talk of wood coasters having "lasting appeal," to which I responded that they aren't perceived that way, and I attributed that to PTC's, which are in fact not running at Kennywood.

WRONG! The Racer runs three bench PTC's.

PTC's are great, with buzz bars of course. The *gear* that PTC has outfitted older trains with has made rides rough (adding all that weight) and uncomfortable.

If you look at some very successful rides like Phoenix - that's a perfect example of what works well and people love.

I believe the problems with a lot of woodies and PTCs isn't teh PTCs but the rides themselves. If properly maintained I have no issues with rides that have PTCs at all and I actually prefer them to MFliers.

Twister, Phoenix, Legend, Raven, Kennywood's Racer, Cornball Express, SFGAM Viper, the list goes on and on, the public loves all these rides.

If you don't do considerable track maintenance, the PTCs can hurt the riders. Ones with softer padding and/or better trackwork can be really sweet. Also, note that SFA's wooden coasters always seem to get higher marks, and their trains get annual rehabs - even more frequent than manufacturer's recommendations. It takes a lot of effort to keep wooden coasters running well - but it is WELL worth it.