Why Giovanola?
What makes you think that they are built like crap? Have you ever ridden one? If you have, you would know that their coasters ride smooth as butter. It is impossible for an amazing coaster to have been built poorly, because to me, a coaster that rides smooth and fast defines a coaster that has been built to perfection.
-------------
I'd Rather Be Riding Rollercoasters
-------------
I'd Rather Be Riding Rollercoasters
The reason why (I think) six flags is starting to use giovanola and B&M hypers is because of their ride capacity. I hear Goliath is very efficient in maintaining a crowd and it moves quickly. B&M's are even better with lines, too. Both rarely break down or have problems. With Intamin (Besides MF) the lines go slower usally because theres one or two trains going. Also, like DWeaver said, they tend to breakdown more and therefore piss off the GP. And we know how devoted SF is devoted to a good time...
Giovanola also has an office in Arlington, TX (near SFOT) and has been pushing for some business there for awhile.
I think were talking about two different things Floridacoasterrider. I know how wonderful Intamin coasters are, and I have ridden just about all of the recent ones built since 1998. My theory is based on how "reliable" they are. When CS breaks down every fifteen minutes, Volcano is down every other time I visit PKD, and Superman has trouble with running more than one train 4 different times I have visited SFA and SFDL, that's where coincidence ends with me. I haven't even mentioned the two year delay for S:TE, and the five month delay for PP. I personally have not seen this with B&M. So it would make sense to me that a park would be better off with a more dependable product. I don't know how that means Intamin rides are bad, but from a business standpoint, to me B&M is by far the better choice.
And I don't buy the theory that Intamin uses more advanced technology as some sort of excuse. If a company specializes in a certain area, their product should work, period *** This post was edited by DWeaver on 3/21/2001. ***
And I don't buy the theory that Intamin uses more advanced technology as some sort of excuse. If a company specializes in a certain area, their product should work, period *** This post was edited by DWeaver on 3/21/2001. ***
DWeaver said:
"Perilous Plunge
Volcano
Superman:Ride of Steel(all 3 of them)
Superman:The Escape
California Screamin'
Can you name even 2 B&Ms that have had these sorts of problems? I didn't think so.
Apples vs. oranges. You are comparing VERY different things that cannot be fairly compared. All those rides use LIMs or LSMs, even PP if I'm not mistaken (to control splash volume). If B&M built LIM launched rides and coasters that ran 6 trains and they ran flawlessly, then an argument might be able to be presented about Intamin being less reliable than B&M. Until that happens, I'm sticking to the apples vs. oranges debate.
-Peabody
I think Intamin has had problems ever since they let their two best designers go.
-------------
Decisions determine destiny; Destiny determines decisions.
-------------
Decisions determine destiny; Destiny determines decisions.
I'd have to agree with DWeaver... Intamin rides are always seeming to break down. As DWeaver pinted out, the S:RoS's (which don't use LIMs or LSMs) weren't too reliable. Also, MF broke down often... Aside from Chang's early-on chain breaks, I don't recall many problems from B&M...
the coaster designer has nothing to do with the physical building of the coaster. the guys who built mf were from ohio i think. and where is intiman from. switzerland i beleive. it just depends on the contractors who are contraced to build the coaster. so take pride in their work and some just don't give a hoot. look at sob it had a lot of problems in the beginning of the summer.
-------------
front car on mf. hope you have the chance to do it.
Everdred said:
"the S:RoS's (which don't use LIMs or LSMs) weren't too reliable"
Actually they do. They all use magnetic breaking. I love how quickly all the S:ROS's come to a complete stop!
-Peabody
You can state your opinion all you want, but if you're going to make a sweeping generalization like that, you're going to have to back it up with some data. See my previous post where I dispute your claim with actual numbers.
DWeaver said:
"As for Intamin, their rides break, open late, are down 20 percent of the time and usually run one train."
And while I haven't looked at the voting data thus far, who wants to bet that the Coasters' Choice Awards for Best New Steel Coaster and Coaster of The Year will be either Millennium Force and/or Superman at SFNE?
In fact, Intamin had three nominations for Best New Steel and two for Coaster of The Year. Since most of these were new last year, they didn't qualify for Best Steel (where B&M has four nominations), but who wants to be that'll change next year?
How could enthusiasts make so many nominations if 20% of them didn't get to ride due to down time?
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
*** This post was edited by Jeff on 3/22/2001. ***
Once again Jeff, your taking on a different arguement, and getting into semantics. Did you even read my post where I gave *specific* examples? What does that have to do with awards these coasters may get? Please go back and read all my posts, there's a theme there, one that your not getting. Superman is my #1 coaster, but you know what? It was still broke down twice while I stood in line. Sure I got to ride it, after a 3 hour wait. I rode Medusa, Goliath, Raging Bull, SKC, Top Gun, Raptor, Mantis, Batman, AC, Riddler Revenge and Vortex without so much as a stall. Coincidence? Maybe, if you choose to see it that way. BTW, is Perilous Plunge working yet?
*** This post was edited by DWeaver on 3/22/2001. ***
No, I didn't read your posts... what do you think? Of course I did. I'm not as stupid as you think.
Your examples are entirely based on your experiences, not industry trends. Show me hard numbers and we'll talk.
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
Your examples are entirely based on your experiences, not industry trends. Show me hard numbers and we'll talk.
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
i doesen't really matter who builds or designs a coaster they are still going to break down. they are mechanical machines and machines break sometimes. i have been in line for mantis and raptor plenty of times when they have broke down.i think last year mf was only shut down for a long period of time because it was struck by lightning
-------------
front car on mf. hope you have the chance to do it.
Jeff said:
"No, I didn't read your posts... what do you think? Of course I did. I'm not as stupid as you think.
Really? Now you can read my thoughts as well?
Your examples are entirely based on your experiences, not industry trends. Show me hard numbers and we'll talk.
Of course they're based on my experiences, hello? That's my whole point. I give up! ;)
Sorry can't pass this one up;
Dweaver all Jeff is asking for are hard facts to back up your statement. That is not an argument in semantics it is a genuine request. Jeff also has a valid argument from his point of view.
Here is my take. If I spend my vacation visiting a park away from home and I only have one or two days at most in the park and a specific ride is has had a breakdown due to nature or something freak whatever the ride is 100% unreliable to me at that point in time because I couldn't ride it.
Now if that same thing happens at my home park that I attend 3 or 4 times a week and for two
of those days the coaster is down because of mechanical failure or maintenance it is no big deal to me because my time to ride that attraction is not limited to a very specific few hours and my getting back to the park is not a far off distance event.
At SFGADV the new Houdini attraction was down more than it was up for the first year. I suspect it was due to mechanical bugs and perhaps attraction upgrades. The fact remains that in that instance if someone had but two days to attempt to ride that attraction and it was down both days the attraction to them would be so much worthless junk.
As far as perilous plunge. I am sorry I have to agree with Jeff. Living on the east coast I don't expect to get to ride it in the very near future as the west coast is not in my immediate travel plans. From what I have seen the ride basically took everyone by surprise when they added water there were problems that could not have been foreseen. You see water does not always comply with the rules or the values given in a computer simulation. Liquids react differently than solids. One major problem with water is the simple fact it can not be compressed. What this means is that when a solid object hits it water has the tendency to act the same way as a brick wall without the give.
I intend to visit SFDL this summer as well as BGW and PKD. I am looking forward to getting to ride coasters and attractions not found at home. I have limited time to spend at each park. If a particular attraction that I am looking forward to enjoying is down because of mechanical failure or maintenance at the time of my visit I will be disappointed to say the least and will probably not have a good perspective on these parks, their equipment or their maintenance staff. It doesn't make anything in the park unreliable.
Unreliable is a word when used around roller coasters makes me uneasy and unwilling to ride as it implies the ride is dangerous and should not be opened to the public to ride in the first place. If a ride is shut down for that reason then it should in my opinion be torn down and replaced with something that does not have the potential to maim or kill someone.
Like I said at the beginning this is my own take on the discussion.
Dweaver all Jeff is asking for are hard facts to back up your statement. That is not an argument in semantics it is a genuine request. Jeff also has a valid argument from his point of view.
Here is my take. If I spend my vacation visiting a park away from home and I only have one or two days at most in the park and a specific ride is has had a breakdown due to nature or something freak whatever the ride is 100% unreliable to me at that point in time because I couldn't ride it.
Now if that same thing happens at my home park that I attend 3 or 4 times a week and for two
of those days the coaster is down because of mechanical failure or maintenance it is no big deal to me because my time to ride that attraction is not limited to a very specific few hours and my getting back to the park is not a far off distance event.
At SFGADV the new Houdini attraction was down more than it was up for the first year. I suspect it was due to mechanical bugs and perhaps attraction upgrades. The fact remains that in that instance if someone had but two days to attempt to ride that attraction and it was down both days the attraction to them would be so much worthless junk.
As far as perilous plunge. I am sorry I have to agree with Jeff. Living on the east coast I don't expect to get to ride it in the very near future as the west coast is not in my immediate travel plans. From what I have seen the ride basically took everyone by surprise when they added water there were problems that could not have been foreseen. You see water does not always comply with the rules or the values given in a computer simulation. Liquids react differently than solids. One major problem with water is the simple fact it can not be compressed. What this means is that when a solid object hits it water has the tendency to act the same way as a brick wall without the give.
I intend to visit SFDL this summer as well as BGW and PKD. I am looking forward to getting to ride coasters and attractions not found at home. I have limited time to spend at each park. If a particular attraction that I am looking forward to enjoying is down because of mechanical failure or maintenance at the time of my visit I will be disappointed to say the least and will probably not have a good perspective on these parks, their equipment or their maintenance staff. It doesn't make anything in the park unreliable.
Unreliable is a word when used around roller coasters makes me uneasy and unwilling to ride as it implies the ride is dangerous and should not be opened to the public to ride in the first place. If a ride is shut down for that reason then it should in my opinion be torn down and replaced with something that does not have the potential to maim or kill someone.
Like I said at the beginning this is my own take on the discussion.
I should end this debate by just stating that I have spent the last three summers on the road at theme parks around the US, so I have seen a lot of this stuff first hand. I have formed an opinion based on that, as well as other enthusiasts who have told me the same thing. If you want to think something different than me, go right ahead. I think I clarified that this is my opinion several posts ago. However, delayed openings and constant breakdowns of the coasters I mentioned are facts, not opinions. It is *my opinion* therefore, that they are unreliable produsts, no matter how great they ride. I hope I clears things up a bit.
All this has what to do with Giovanola? I have a feeling that this topic will be closed very soon. Anywho...I think that I will stay neutral here and make no comment. Why did I post this? Um, I was bored. Yes, that is it. Now let me just get something out of my car. [runs] [car peels out] :)
*** This post was edited by sfmmman2001 on 3/22/2001. ***
You must be logged in to post
