whats up with B&M and their height problems?

i read somewhere that cedar point first went to B&M with the "giga coaster" idea and that it was turned down because B&M thought it was too tall. did they think it couldnt be done or what? its not striking me very well but for some reason alot of concepts are said to be "impossible". i dont remember if it was the flying coaster idea but they said it couldnt be done but vekoma did it(and arrow made X work :-)

but does anyone know why B&M doesnt make any 300+ ft coasters?

A B&M giga-coaster would be awsome!
-----------------
Is there somthing more, then what I've been handed, I've been crawling in the dark looking for the answers!- Hoobastank

Oh yeah? Where did ya read that?
-----------------
Is it the roar of Kumba or the kumba of Roar? Discuss!

Why? Because no one has bought one from them. If someone wants to pay enough, they'll build one.

There is no proof (that I know of) that B&M said 300 feet was "to tall". So they chose not to submit a bid..(they had 7 other coasters for 2000), or if CP went with Intamin's bid that doesn't mean that they wouldn't build 300+.

Also, B&M never said that flying was impossible. They've been workiing on the concept since the early 90s.

-----------------
- Peabody

maybe it was the 4-D concept. i dont remember where i read it because i was reading every article i could find about it when i found out about it. maybe it was just a rumor, but still. if SFMM can afford 3 new coasters in one year, tell me why they cant afford one big one. it still adds up. and bet you all that if B&M changed to 2 seats across, the price would drop. the track needs to be wider to support the 4 seat style. its not a dramatic amount, but steel is expensive.

It was a semi-reliable rumor that B&M was either among the bidders or turned down the opportunity to build Millennium Force. Is it true? Don't know, but given the source I heard it from, I think there's some credibility (and you know how I otherwise hate rumors).

Interestingly enough we've seen B&M move to much deeper track spines and fewer supports on some rides (like Silverstar). It's kind of like Intamin's use of four-rail track versus two or three. I don't know, I get the impression they'd do a 300-footer given the chance.

-----------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com, Sillynonsense.com
"As far as I can tell it doesn't matter who you are. If you can believe, there's something worth fighting for..." - Garbage, "Parade"

coasterdude04 said:
and bet you all that if B&M changed to 2 seats across, the price would drop. the track needs to be wider to support the 4 seat style. its not a dramatic amount, but steel is expensive.

Why would B&M do that? To dramatically reduce capacity. They need their highly articulated single bench trains to do their elements and maintain their smoothness. Whether it's 4 abreast or 2, 36 people weigh the same amount, and it would take about the same weight train to carry them. (Heck a 36 person, 2 abreast, single bench train would most likely weigh more!)
About SFMM...why would they want 1 big coaster like a Giga instead of the three they got for 2001?

-----------------
- Peabody

i completely understand what you are saying peabody, i was just stating that it might be less expensive to build. but yes, like you said, it would mess up a whole lot of things they have come to achieve. but smoothness? whats wrong with intamin?

coasterdude04 said:
but smoothness? whats wrong with intamin?

Nothing, but their trains wouldn'r track as smoothly on a B&M circuit. B&M really exploits what can be done with a single bench train, much like GCI with their Millennium Flyers.

-----------------
- Peabody

I'm not sure there'd be much difference between a B&M giga and the others that exist.

Millennium Force is as smooth as any B&M I've been on - and that smoothness is pretty much all B&M's reputation is built on. It's not like you're going to see the classic B&M elements on a coaster that big. It'd be a speed coaster like Nitro more than likely. Intamin does it just as well as B&M likely would at that size. I think B&M should stick to what they do best - nice smooth smaller coasters with great elements.

If b&m makes there coasters small and first and only add 15ft every coaster they will sell more so they can be the tallst/Fastest.
-----------------

I agree with Jeff, if B&M were asked to build a 300 footer, I think they'd be ready to do it. There isn't exactly a high demand for them in the US anyway, with Intamin having built all of one. Most parks seem very happy with 200 footers, they're cheaper, take less room and IMO provide just as many thrills.
-----------------
Have you ever considered that maybe it's not the park that's the problem, but YOU?

Am I the only one who thinks B&M should stay away from Hyper's altogether? Here's my reasoning:

The trains are way too heavy and don't provide enough airtime.

The restraints are pretty good at plopping down really tight and staying there, causing much less airtime.

And, the best reason:

On Nitro, it only goes 80 mph. At the bottom of the first drop, the trains shake so much it's a wonder to me they don't tear themselves apart! I mean, it's like sitting in the middle of LA during an earthquake at the bottom! I can't imagine what would happen if B&M were to hit 90 mph on those trains.

-----------------
-Kyle Brylczyk
SAVE INVADER ZIM!

So basically what you're saying is that since B&M trains are very secure and don't provide enough airtime, they should stop making hypercoasters alltogether? That is dumb.
-----------------
Is it the roar of Kumba or the kumba of Roar? Discuss!

Wow Coaster131, sounds like the newer Nitro is in worse condition the older Raging Bull. Sure, the lap bar does come down, but what do you expect with positive Gs? For it to pop up a notch? If they would get a spring in there to keep it up with that many Gs, then in the station they could possible hit someone quite hard. I wouldn't want to be the stupid person that for some reason has his or her chin in the way of the extremely sudden returning-to-upright position lapbars.
Also on RB there isn't really any vibrating at the bottom of the hill, and as you say, it's "only" 72 or 73 miles per hour. Trains heavy meaning no airtime? I get airtime on Raging Bull. Sure it's not nearly the most powerful I've experienced, but I get it even when they have the 3rd hill trim on. Maybe you don't get much airtime on Nitro because it doesn't have many normal shaped camel backs on it. Raging Bull doesn't have many, 2 or 3 at most, but I still get air, and quite a bit. Oh, did I mention that Raging Bull is an older B&M speed (not hyper) coaster?
edit: Or are they mega coasters? I forgot what B&M calls it, speed or mega...
-----------------
I have no signature.

*** This post was edited by TrBiggar on 2/19/2002. ***

You may not get ejector airtime on B&M hypers(aka Raging Bull), but the floating airtime sure as heck makes up for it.
-----------------
Im going to grab a cold one! WHAT? Walk to my computer! WHAT? Turn the thing on! WHAT? Log on to Coasterbuzz! WHAT? I said log on to Coasterbuzz!! WHAT?WHAT?WHAT?

I dunno, I've found plenty of airtime on both Nitro and Apollo's Chariot, and I LOVE those trains. Very comfortable and open, and the bars don't come down on me at all.
-----------------
--Greg
"The collective women in your life have more baggage than a Samsonite factory..."
My page

Ditto, Gregleg. Plenty of air, and I've never had the bar come down on any of the 3 B&M hypers.
-----------------
- Peabody

*** This post was edited by Peabody on 2/19/2002. ***

It cracks me up to no end when people say Nitro doesn't have air. I love having video proof. :)

I don't *ever* have a problem with the lap restraints because I know exactly when to keep it from falling down and when to have both hands in the air.

It is true, Nitro did have a shimmy at the bottom of the first drop, but to say it felt like an LA earthquake is so ridiculous. I can't imagine what would happen to your frail body when you ride a wooden coaster, Kyle!

BTW, TrBiggar, they are Mega Coasters.

-JC, whose favorite type of coaster is the B&M Mega.

-----------------
"Look for the big black sack of Mofuggin Nuts at your local grocery store". -- Radio ad in FL

B&M is unlikely to switch from their 4 wide trains. Their design philosopy seems to be to provide a very controled ride. This is also shown by the way B&M uses trims. The shorter train provided by 4 wide seating results in less variation in ride from seat to seat.

If you are in the businees of building coasters you have to look at how much work you have in house and make sure that you don't overextend yourself like a certain other coaster manufacturer did last year. Building the first Giga required a lot of extra engineering time from Intamin. Intamin engineers were at CP all summer in 2000 to support the start up of MF. B&M may have felt that they couldn't make this type of commitment while providning good customer service to their other customers. (This is not a cut towards Intamin. Apparently they had the people available.)

Jeff says that coaster manufacturers will build whatever the customer wants. This isn't strictly true. If a coaster manufacturer is smart he will make sure that he only builds something that he can do a quality job of. Otherwise he destroys his reputation and future business.