Xcelerator Length - CoasterBuzz

I read that Xcelerator was actually supposed be longer than what it is now. Apparently, there was supposed to be a helix after the second overbanked hill. Due to the accident on Perilous Plunge, the helix was scrapped so that G-forces could be kept to a minimum. Is this true?

-----------------
Intelligence is a God given gift: Know how to use it.

I think it has more to do with the lack of space on the plot of land Xcellerator was planned for

-----------------
I AM CANADIAN
why aren't you?

When Jack Falfas explained the layout to me way back in July of 2001 it was exactly as it is today: launch, top hat, figure eight, brake run.

Moosh

-----------------
"Mmmmm....forbidden donut!" - Homer Simpson

While it is just rumor, it is said that the helix was scrapped after the Goliath accident in 2000. They were suppousedly afraid of the high G's that this helix would pull, much like those on Goliath. Once again, that is only a rumor (though it would still be consistent with what Mamoosh said, since this occured significantly earlier).

Trust me, they could have easily fit another 1,000ft of track in that area. Standing in the queue, you can definitely see where they have lots more room they could have used.

Also, not many coasters pull helixes at speeds that XC would have. They would have to be very wide to counteract G forces( See CP new coaster).

Remember a little thing called money?? Xcelerator as it is now was around 13 million. If they added 1000 feet of more track, I'm sure it would have been in the 15-16 million dollar range. Cedar Point didnt even have Cap-ex like that last season.

But, there are footers in the brake turnaround area popping up... (Man, I love stirring the controversy pot!)

-----------------
I hear a train a comin'
Comin' round the bend :P
TR2k3....GET READY!

*** This post was edited by Chris Godsey on 9/17/2002. ***

Chris Godsey said:

Also, not many coasters pull helixes at speeds that XC would have. They would have to be very wide to counteract G forces( See CP new coaster).

...or at least very high up. Personally, I love helixes and the way they push you down in your seat, almost as much as I love air time. I'd love to see one in the new CP coaster.

Chris Godsey said:

Trust me, they could have easily fit another 1,000ft of track in that area. Standing in the queue, you can definitely see where they have lots more room they could have used.
Also, not many coasters pull helixes at speeds that XC would have. They would have to be very wide to counteract G forces( See CP new coaster).
Remember a little thing called money?? Xcelerator as it is now was around 13 million. If they added 1000 feet of more track, I'm sure it would have been in the 15-16 million dollar range. Cedar Point didnt even have Cap-ex like that last season.
But, there are footers in the brake turnaround area popping up... (Man, I love stirring the controversy pot!)
-----------------
I hear a train a comin'
Comin' round the bend :P
TR2k3....GET READY!

That's not true. Yes, there is space in the main queuing area, but if you actually take time to look at things, there really is not a thing you could add to the ride and yet still be able to have it come to a near stop on the brake-run. There isn't enough room. All of you who think there is need to take some time and get a good perspective on things. You may WANT TO think that there was more room, but I even doubt Knott's would purposely waste land by building something that could have been longer. THEY DID use the land to its maximum potential with the Rocket Coaster model. That's all they could put in there.

The ride was never meant to be more than it is, a test model for the new CP-full version. No helices, no tunnels, no extra track. What they could have done is really a moot point because nothing else was intended. The Top Hat was the tough part because Jack was worried about excessive negative Gs. Once those fears were laid to rest, Xcelerator became what it was meant to be. If you walk up to him as I did he'll tell you all about the ride.

Funny, standing in the queue, I couldn't help but to think about the S&S TA2K test model in Utah, and how Xcel looks like a "dressed up" Intamin test model for bigger things to come. I was right...

-----------------
"Escuse me, can you tell me where the heck the Mystery Lodge is"?

*** This post was edited by OutKast on 9/17/2002. ***

Noting that Knotts didn't have much room to work with. I still think building a coaster that was over 200ft tall and less than 3000ft long to be a huge waist.

Give me Raven anyday.

Chuck, not at all saying Xcellerator is a bad ride but probably not what it could have been.

-----------------
Charles Nungester.
Is it about coasters or friends? I say both!

Then again Charles, it wouldn't be the first time. There aren't too many launch coasters over 3000ft long, and most of them come close or top 200ft. Heck, even Volcano is less than 3,000ft long. So Knott's isn't the lone culprit here.

-----------------
"Escuse me, can you tell me where the heck the Mystery Lodge is"?

Besides as I said before, the larger CP version is mostly possible because Knott's test version has been reletively successful. How can that be a waste?

-----------------
"Escuse me, can you tell me where the heck the Mystery Lodge is"?

Xcelerator is by no means a waste. The top hat-ish element has the most force full airtime of any coaster in California. The launch is incredible. Don't knock a ride for something it lacks, celebrate it for what it has. Besides, (speculation) I don't think CP's rocketcoaster will have a ton of elements either.

I agree that more would be better. I also say that space was not a problem. Ever see a spaghetti bowl coaster? Maybe Intamin has not ever designed one, but they do exist.

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

I think there was more space for a longer layout but I agree that is was a prototype for CP's new one. The ride is still great, but an extra hill or two could have done wonders for it. They could have changed the qeue line so it doesn't go right through the middle of the layout which would allow more track.

-----------------
84 coasters and counting

Of course Cedar Point is getting the bigger and better version, it's always like this with Cedar Fair. But sometimes they get greedy and get dud rides like Mean Streak while the farm gets Ghostrider. Maybe its all just a coincidence.

On second thought....nope, its all planned out so they can "try" to give Cedar Point the biggest and the best.

-----------------
Deja Vu doesn't have fastlane, but it has a fastlane line.

Well, I wish they'd take out Mean Streak and try again there. CP needs a good mega woodie to go with its awesome small woodie (Blue Streak). Mean Streak sure ain't it. I say scrap it and start agian, this time giving emphasis to great air time and great helixes, with good speed and good length. The only thing Mean Streak has of all those things is a decent length and speed (well, except for all those damn trim brakes).

It's funny really because the supposed "People Who Know" over at AmericaCoasters claim that Xcelerator WAS going to be longer. They say that it was originally going to have another overbanked turn, and a helix. I guess it's almost impossible to know the truth in the coaster world...So many different ideas and sources...

-----------------
Intelligence is a God given gift: Know how to use it.

How would the ride be better by being longer? That's not necessarily true. After the EXTREME take-off and top-hat element, the ride was already at its peak (which was almost enough for me it was just incredible) but the two overbanks hit you so fast that you can't help but to get a bit of blurred vision.

I don't recall HyperSonic XLC having these short length "problems" and "complaints" when it opened, and it is much worse in all entirety compared to Xcelerator. It's not as high, not as fast, and MUCH shorter than XLC. Let's also add that Xcelerator is not down every other day like XLC.