U.S. To get its first Maurer Söhne X-Car-Coaster

Plus there's the version going in in Spain. That looks like a lot of fun as well.

---

dragonoffrost said:
Does any coaster flip you over at exactly 150 feet at the start and the end of the flip? If not, that statement is not a lie. You have to love people getting all worked up over making a stat be deceptive but true.

---

Not only is there an identical coaster to this in Germany, but Volcano's inversion is at 155' THUS it is not the world's only...

Please reread what I said. It makes the Volcano arguement a moot point. Volcano's inversion is at 155' not exactly 150'. Sky Wheel's height is 150' 11" per rcdb. They want to play on a technicality I think.

But rcdb has this new one also listed at 150' 11" so maybe I am wrong there. A good marketer would get them to cut 11 inches off the height somehow. It is a great case of making the statistics say what you want, if they actually do have it invert at exactly 150' and no other coaster does invert at exactly 150'.

*smacks head against desk* I hate remembering my college marketing and statistics courses. Both of those classes prove, you can make words say anything you want and still be right most of the time on some technicality. *** Edited 12/15/2005 1:18:22 PM UTC by dragonoffrost***

Clipping various quotes...

"I just don't see this coaster justifying a trip down to the land of Wal-mart Home Office. I still say they should have built a GCII."

I don't get this. Do you really think it would be any different if they built a woodie? What non-enthusiast would make a special trip to Arkansas to ride a wooden coaster? Plus, I never thought of Magic Springs as a 'destination' park. I doubt if their intention is to pull attendance from across the country with one addition--they're not Cedar Point or Disney (yet), but with the last couple of coasters they seem to be making some nice progress. I think the X-Coaster is a good move for them.

"Can you say lie!"

Does pissing & moaning over a slight technicality in a marketing statement ever get old to anyone else? I'm sure execs at PKD and Skyline Park are having a holy conniption about this as we speak. Litigation's gonna start any minute...0h N0eZ!!1!1

"What's currently standing is only the first phase of construction. If and when the park wants to, "it can be extended in two further investment steps, thus keeping pace with the expected boost in visitor numbers and adding more kicks." (to quote rcdb). That essentially means that, should the park wish to excercise its option to construct these phases, the "finished" Skywheel layout could look a little something like this."

I was unaware of this, but what a great idea. However, the realist (or pessimist, take your pick) in me thinks that expansion on the initial structure is not likely to happen. It seems to me it would make a lot more sense to spend whatever money is needed for the next phase of the X-Coaster on a brand new attraction. This way, they can market a brand new attraction instead of expanding on an old one. Sure, the expanded old attraction can be marketed as 'brand new' as well, but they wouldn't be adding to the park's ride count. Hope I'm wrong, as I'd love to see a park carry out all 3 phases, but I just don't see it happening. I'm still liking even the initial layout of this ride.

-Mike "it's too short!1!!!/it's not the highest inversion!!!1!1!/I'm not gonna drive 10 hours just for that1!1!!1!!!" B.