Why the difference in height restrictions???

Thursday, July 11, 2002 7:45 AM

Last year while at BGW we rode Apollo's Chariot and the height limit as only 52 inches while the height limit for Raging Bull at SFGAM was 54 inches. Since both coasters are made by B & M and are similiar rides does anybody know why the difference in height limits between the coasters???

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:07 AM

I have wondered that myself Bob O. Another example is V2 at SFGAm is 54" while S:UE at SFWoA is 52".

If some of these rides at SFGAm were set at 52" like some of the other parks with similiar coasters, my daughter would be able to join me. :)

-----------------
""To be the man, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!, You got to beat the man""!!!

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:10 AM

It might be a decision by either park... they want to manage how many of their guests can go on... lowering the limit by 2 inches may still be safe, but Busch Gardens wanted more people to be able to go on Apollo's Chariot.

That is interesting that BGW went against the advised height, as almost all of B&M's rides have a height requirement of 54 inches to ride.

-----------------
Jes
Jes's Roller Coasters DJ Jes MCS Please, Feel Free To Call Me Jes!
Six Flags Worlds Of Adventure 2002 Ride-Ops Crew

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:16 AM

Also what is it with that 48 inch requirement? Almost all rides have that. Its sorta sad that a mine train ride has the same height requirement as a giga coaster. They aren't accurate. Also I think that if my brother went on Big Bad Wolf when he was 3 and was 42 inches I think he can go on the Mine Ride @ CP when hes five and 47 inches IMO. But I won't fight with the ride ops. Its not their decision.

-----------------
Dan - Webmaster of Coastny!
http://coastny.cjb.net

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:17 AM
Come to think about it, there also might be discrepancies between state-to-state requirements. Ohio's Department of Agriculture may have different standards for rides than that of the department that regulates rides in Virginia and Illinois. This also might explain why S:UE isn't permitted to use wheel covers anymore (Same for WT, it was the State's decision not to allow us), but most all other Impulses (In other states) still use them.

-----------------
Jes
Jes's Roller Coasters DJ Jes MCS Please, Feel Free To Call Me Jes!
Six Flags Worlds Of Adventure 2002 Ride-Ops Crew

*** This post was edited by Zero-G on 7/11/2002. ***

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:17 AM

Zero-G said:

It might be a decision by either park... they want to manage how many of their guests can go on... lowering the limit by 2 inches may still be safe, but Busch Gardens wanted more people to be able to go on Apollo's Chariot.

That is interesting that BGW went against the advised height, as almost all of B&M's rides have a height requirement of 54 inches to ride.

-----------------
Jes
Jes's Roller Coasters DJ Jes MCS Please, Feel Free To Call Me Jes!
Six Flags Worlds Of Adventure 2002 Ride-Ops Crew



I'm happy that its 52. I don't understand why all beemers are 54? There are so many more intense coasters out there than AP and most b&ms that have a 48 inch requirement. It must be their tm or something "54 inches"

-----------------
Dan - Webmaster of Coastny!
http://coastny.cjb.net

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:19 AM
....thinking the insurance companies covering the various parks have some say.....ok, a LOT of say....;)
+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:36 AM

Maybe it has something to do with restraint size. I can't account for the differences between like rides (RB & AC) but my thinking is that if you have a restraint (like most B&M loopers) that has a minimum height restriction of 54", maybe it is easier for larger people (height and weight) to fit into that restraint as well.

I personally think that works a little better than Arrow's system, where most of the rides are 48", and you get people who will wear the OTSR like a necklace (no offense to ANYONE.)

The problem you run into with B&M loopers (most of them, as Kumba is a good example of a break from the rule) is the seatbelt, which makes their restraints even more restrictive.

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 9:04 AM
I think the maxixum limit should be 52. 54' is really unnessecary for some rides, at least in my opinion.
+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 9:28 AM

The 54 is there for a good reason on a lot of rides. Inverts or floorless especially. If you leg is to short and you are not able to move your leg at the knee the g's will pull down on your leg and possibly break it.

It amazes me everyone constantly complains about stuff like this. The rules are out there to protect people and to protect the parks from lawsuits. They aren't there just to piss some people off.

-----------------
The Beast and Night, They go together like Peanut Butter and Jelly

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 9:35 AM

Zero-G said:
This also might explain why S:UE isn't permitted to use wheel covers anymore (Same for WT, it was the State's decision not to allow us), but most all other Impulses (In other states) still use them.

The only impulse that might use wheel covers is Screaming Condor (I don't know of any pictures of it online so I'm unable to tell). None of the other impulse coasters have wheel covers, though I can't imagine why that would be a state safety decision.


-Nate


+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 9:36 AM

Factor's in determining height limits:

Seat and restraint design
Manufacturer's recommendation
Forces imposed on the rider by the ride
Park's safety people and engineers
Park chain's safety people and engineers
Park's insurers
Park's lawyers
Regulatory agencies

Usually, the most restrictive of the above will govern.

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 10:41 AM
Superdude: SFMM is the same way, Ninja has a height requirement of 42", and the GoldRusher Mine Train is 48". What I don't get is why Viper's requirement is 54" when it has the exact same restraints as Ninja.

I think the B&M's with the OTSR's require the 54" because of that type of restraint. It really swallows a smaller rider. And it DOES NOT offer lots of room for a larger rider. B&M's are the only rides I have a problem fitting into, I fit, but just barely. Then again, Ive never ridden an Intamin Invert.

-------------
Nothing... NOTHING... can prepare you for... the Fourth Dimension!

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 1:13 PM

My daughter also was upset she could ride Apoll's Chariot while on vacation and not Raging Bull on her home park. I would think the manufactuer would set the height limit because if their was a accident and the height may have been a issue the park would be putting itself more in jeopardy in civil court.by not following the manufactuer's guidlines for safety.Its just weird to have different height limits.

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 2:48 PM
Disney is VERY laxed on height requirements. 44" for Space Mountain. 40" for Splash Mountain. Obviously niether is a real extreme ride, however both restrictions are substantially less than most other parks for similar ride types.
+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 2:52 PM
I wish that the industry would set a standard for all rides. I am a large person, 6' 3." I have never had any trouble riding any ride at any park in the past. This year, I went to CP to ride WT and could not get the OTSR safety belt locked on the test seat. The ride op at the beginning of the queue stopped me and suggested that I try the seat and I stated that I had no trouble on Raptor or Mantis. She said that these seats were smaller and that I should try it. She saved me an hour wait in line. That really upset me. After following the construction all winter, I really wanted to ride the WT. I don't know why the Intamin seats are so much smaller than B&M or Arrow seats. It really ruined the day, even though the rest of the day at the Point was great. It would be nice if the manufacturers would get together and come up with a standard seat size. One that includes tall people.

-----------------
The worst day at Cedar Point is better than the best day at work.

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 3:34 PM

another example:

S:RoS(SFA) = 54"

Millenium Force = 48"

does this make any sense at all? millenium force is much more intense, in G's forces and other aspects. but i do find it funny that i saw a 6yr girl ride(who met the 48" requirement), but i couldnt even get my 12 yr old brother on corkscrew...so funny...

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 3:45 PM
Half the problem with Intamin Inveryed restraint is the belt on the outside. While they are easier to check they are very hard for a larger person to attach because to attach them you have to lean forward which works against what you are trying to do.

-----------------
The Beast and Night, They go together like Peanut Butter and Jelly

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:53 PM

I couldn't get it by myself MagnumForce, so the ride op tried to get the belt to lock while I pulled down on the OTSR. It was close, but it would not go. I tried to suck in my gut, but that made no difference. It was hitting my chest and there was nothing I could do. I asked the ride op if she could push in on the bar and she said that they are not allowed to assist like that. I saw people smaller than me who did not fit the WT test seat, while people larger than I rhad no trouble on the other rides. I posted a tread on this and others said that they also had trouble with WT and no other trouble with any other rides. I guess if you are tall and want to ride an Intamin invert, stay lean.

-----------------
The worst day at Cedar Point is better than the best day at work.

+0
Thursday, July 11, 2002 5:11 PM

Coasterdude04 the height restriction on SFA's S:ROS has been reduced from 54 inches to 52 inches.

At least that's what it reads on the park map in the ride listing page,who knows though maybe they printed some of the information incorrectly this year.

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...