Wednesday, July 25, 2001 8:57 PM
Does a coaster have to be 200+ ft.tall to be considered a "hyper" or can a coaster with a 200+ ft drop qualify as one. In other words, is Phantom's Revenge a true "hyper" because of it's 220+ drop or does it fall short of being called one because the lift is around 160 ft. By the same token, does a coaster have to have a lift height of 300+ ft to be considered a "giga"?
Wednesday, July 25, 2001 9:09 PM
It's an opinion thing. Or maybe it's a designer thing. I think if I wanted to, I could go build myself a 20 foot tall coaster and call it a hypercoaster. If anyone would say it isn't, I'd tell them to ask the manufacturer, which would be me, therefore it would be a hyper.
Thats why I think it's opinion.
Intamin: Steel gifts from the gods.
CCI: Wooden gifts from the gods.
Wednesday, July 25, 2001 9:31 PM
It's opinion, and God knows this thread would just result in people bickering about how Phantom's Revenge isn't a hyper because it's not over 200' tall. Then people would say Magnum was the first over 200' tall, so you have to judge by it. Then someone else would jump in with the Moonsault Scramble argument.
It's been done, it goes the same way
each time. So if you want to call Phantom's Revenge a hyper, go ahead. If you don't, that's fine. It's up to you.
Co-Webmaster, Kennywood Boulevard http://kennywood.coasterbuzz.com