Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Carowinds | Fury 325 | B&M Giga Coaster

LiveForTheLaunch said:
I get why people might think Intimidator and Fury325 are too similar, because this was obviously the thought that people had when Wonderland debuted Leviathan when they had Behemoth right across the park. They are NOTHING the same and I can assure you that Intimidator will continue to pull crowds. Behemoth and Leviathan continue to get equal crowds on any given day. It's not as if Behemoth's queue is riddled with tumbleweeds these days.
Click to expand...

Intimidator will still pull crowds, sure. Everything pulls crowds at a park, even the ****. Something is always better than nothing.

But when you think about how much they're spending on this, I just can't get on-board with it making the most sense.

I'm sure it'll be fun. But imagine if Liseberg announced tomorrow they're getting another Mack Launched coaster. I'm sure it'd be fun, yes, but everyone would point out how utterly pointless that is. There seems to be this blind side with B&M Hypers that people don't care, just chuck more in.

Here's a question - what if they got a third? One that's 350ft? Would you say that makes sense? How about a park with nothing but B&M Hypers!?

I'm just saying something different like a Mack Launch or an RMC Woodie would have gone down a treat.

And Leviathan annoys me in exactly the same way but at least the brake run on this isn't quite as offensive as Leviathan.
 
I have to agree with Ben, this ride does look truely amazing in every single way but I feel like the park could have gotten something a little different it would have been nice. It's like Alton Towers adding an accelerater that is longer and higher. It does seem pointless, just because intimadater and this both do different things in some aspects it does kind of make intimadater a bit useless now.
 
Well, a park with nothing but B&M Hypers would be known to the GP as "the park where all the coasters are taller than 60 metres". which would be rather marketable in itself. Regardless of what Behemoth/Leviathan or Intimidator/Fury does, they're still both really big coasters in the eyes of most people. Yes, one might be taller than the other, but the other is still a mightily big rollercoaster, and being the smallest doesn't diminish its ride experience that much.

Of course it's redundant, of course it's boring to us, but from a business perspective, it still works pretty well. Big coasters tend to pull crowds, regardless of what they look like. I'd imagine the maintenance guys would be happy too, since the hardware and software for the two rides would be pretty much identical.

EDIT to clarify: Not saying that this tactic works perfectly every time, though. Having two Boomerangs or two terrain launchers wouldn't be nearly as easily forgiveable, since those rides can't impress by size and scope alone. Hypers and Gigas sell because of their size and speed, and if people want to ride big and fast coasters, they would happily ride two almost identical ones, since both are very impressive on their own. The smallest of two giants is still a giant, after all. And since gigantism sells, they would both sell.

EDIT2: Was it called Stinger? Never! My post wasn't edited to correct for that! You must all have dreamt it up. Especially elephant58, who in no way pointed out a mistake that was never there. Not at all.
 
I think it will be the worst Giga coaster. I personally think it needs a little more airtime, which might save it, but otherwise it will be like Raging Bull but with a drop of Leviathan.
 
I mean... If you seriously, truly, honestly believe Leviathan is that similar to Behemoth or Fury is that similar to Intimidator, then... I don't know, I don't think I believe you've ridden Leviathan. Or you have but you're so jaded that you can't differentiate between rides with the same seats anymore.

Either way, you're wrong, that's it, like it's not really that debatable. They are clearly different rides. They do totally different things, they are 100% distinct experiences... The end, they're not the same. You're reducing these coasters to their factory models without paying any attention to what they actually do. All these lines you're drawing are made-up. What makes two roller coasters different from each other is not what the track looks like, it's what the track does, and cannot imagine someone riding Leviathan and Behemoth in the same day and thinking they have anything meaningful in common beyond "big drop, goes fast." It's not as black and white as you're trying to make it.

If you're complaining about this, then I fully expect you to also complain about
Grizzly and Gold Striker @ CGA
Prowler and Timber Wolf @ WoF
Boss and Screamin Eagle and American Thunder @ SFSL
Renegade and High Roller @ Valleyfair
American Eagle and Viper @ SFGAm
Shivering Timbers and Wolverine Wildcat @ MIA
Voyage and Legend and Raven @ Holiday World
Beast and Racer @ Kings Island
Bizarro and Green Lantern @ SFGAdv
Magnum XL-200 and Millennium Force @ CP (if anything, these two have MORE in common)
Grizzly and Hurler and Rebel Yell @ KD (again, Grizzly and Hurler are probably more alike)
Thunder Run and Hurler @ Carowinds itself
Mighty Canadian Minebuster and Wild Beast @ Wonderland itself

And again, even if they are the same, it's not a zero-sum game. It doesn't make any difference. It will sell tickets for Carowinds, people will love it, and the lines for Intimidator will be just as long as they were this season. You can't look at this industry like a collector, that's not how it works.
 
Jason Voorhees said:
I think it will be the worst Giga coaster. I personally think it needs a little more airtime, which might save it, but otherwise it will be like Raging Bull but with a drop of Leviathan.
Click to expand...
Probably one of the dumbest statements I've ever read on the Forum. How the hell will this be like Raging Bull? Did you even see the layout? They're nothing alike and there's no trim on the second hill that kills the rest of the ride (like Raging Bull). :roll:
fury_layout_zoom.jpg


rblayout.jpg
 
Ben said:
I'm sure it'll be fun. But imagine if Liseberg announced tomorrow they're getting another Mack Launched coaster. I'm sure it'd be fun, yes, but everyone would point out how utterly pointless that is.

I'm just saying something different like a Mack Launch or an RMC Woodie would have gone down a treat.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you at all Ben, but in a way Liseberg almost did the same thing with Kanonen and then Helix.

Don't get me wrong, Fury will be a great but for the same cost they could have done say a medium/large sized coaster, and then yet another one in a following season (perhaps a substantial family sized coaster) for the same total sum and gotten a better overall ROI and attendance kick.
 
I get that people are arguing against the idea of a B&M Hyper/Giga combination (just like they were when Leviathan was announced) and I completely understand that members would rather Carowinds get something completely unique to them. But, don't start questioning the financial sense of building Fury325; Carowinds are building this off of the back of Leviathan and how popular it was. It's a business decision, simple as.
 
And if anything.. Carowinds needs a big crowd pleaser.. because that park, besides Afterburn, was a waste of 4 hours of my day.
 
owenrita121 said:
Fury isn't longer and I've not seen anyone call this an awful idea...
Click to expand...
There is a certain insinuation when you claim that Fury 325 will now make "intimidator a bit useless" or that "I feel like the park could have gotten something a little different" that communicates folks do not agree with the building of Fury 325.

Also to this point:

Hobbes said:
steel said:
There are no "holes" in Carowinds's lineup, that's not how this industry works. There's no checklist, there are no quotas, and literally nobody outside this tiny community cares one bit. New roller coasters aren't chosen based on what the park doesn't have yet, they're chosen based on what will serve their market and sell tickets. It WOULD be fun to see a launch or an RMC at Carowinds (incidentally I love the crap out of Thunder Run, I think it's a fantastic old ride), and we very well might before too long. But, what, are you expecting people to like, complain? People who in all likelihood have no idea what LSM stands for and never will?
Click to expand...

You're right that the industry doesn't function based on this idea of a standard lineup, I know that. But when we look at parks (especially chain parks of Carowind's size), there are certain types of rides that we expect to see. Obviously there are exceptions (tons of them), but when we look at a large Cedar Fair park, chances are we will see a hyper, invert, woodie, launch, etc. I know that this idea of a checklist is not the system used to determine new rides, but it is still a fair point to see that a park does not have a certain style of ride.

And no, I'm not expecting people to complain, I'm ridiculously excited for this thing to open. It looks fantastic and I pretty much expect it to be my new favorite when I ride it. It'll be a great addition.
Click to expand...
Very much in agreeance with Hobbes. There is absolutely a standard lineup that can be found at all major amusement parks in the US. For instance, can you find a major amusement park that does not have a log flume, river rapids, and shoot-the-chutes? Can be a bit difficult, right?

There are definite staples that make an amusement park competitive, such as:

- 200 ft. steel coaster
- Mine train coaster
- racing coaster
- launched steel coaster
- alternative riding position coaster (Invert, stand-up, floorless, flyer)
- shuttle coaster
- corkscrew coaster

To that end, Cedar Fair is making the 300 ft. coaster even more so a staple in their amusement park lineups.
 
Hyde said:
To that end, Cedar Fair is making the 300 ft. coaster even more so a staple in their amusement park lineups.
Click to expand...
Which is a very concious move I think; to separate their parks from Six Flags. If you want to "go big", go to Cedar Fair, not Six Flags :wink: Especially now when SF are concentrating on cheap solutions like RMC make-overs, CF are seeing their chance to profile their parks with big massive class A rides! Yes, we know that RMC make some fantastic stuff, and they're doing great at their respective park. But A 300ft giga coaster sure is a lot more appealing to the general public than a refurb woodie, and a much more usefull ride in park PR!
 
Hyde said:
Hobbes said:
steel said:
There are no "holes" in Carowinds's lineup, that's not how this industry works. There's no checklist, there are no quotas, and literally nobody outside this tiny community cares one bit. New roller coasters aren't chosen based on what the park doesn't have yet, they're chosen based on what will serve their market and sell tickets. It WOULD be fun to see a launch or an RMC at Carowinds (incidentally I love the crap out of Thunder Run, I think it's a fantastic old ride), and we very well might before too long. But, what, are you expecting people to like, complain? People who in all likelihood have no idea what LSM stands for and never will?
Click to expand...

You're right that the industry doesn't function based on this idea of a standard lineup, I know that. But when we look at parks (especially chain parks of Carowind's size), there are certain types of rides that we expect to see. Obviously there are exceptions (tons of them), but when we look at a large Cedar Fair park, chances are we will see a hyper, invert, woodie, launch, etc. I know that this idea of a checklist is not the system used to determine new rides, but it is still a fair point to see that a park does not have a certain style of ride.

And no, I'm not expecting people to complain, I'm ridiculously excited for this thing to open. It looks fantastic and I pretty much expect it to be my new favorite when I ride it. It'll be a great addition.
Click to expand...
Very much in agreeance with Hobbes. There is absolutely a standard lineup that can be found at all major amusement parks in the US. For instance, can you find a major amusement park that does not have a log flume, river rapids, and shoot-the-chutes? Can be a bit difficult, right?

There are definite staples that make an amusement park competitive, such as:

- 200 ft. steel coaster
- Mine train coaster
- racing coaster
- launched steel coaster
- alternative riding position coaster (Invert, stand-up, floorless, flyer)
- shuttle coaster
- corkscrew coaster

To that end, Cedar Fair is making the 300 ft. coaster even more so a staple in their amusement park lineups.
Click to expand...

Nah this is a made-up phenomenon, just plain not a true. Correlation is not causation. If this line-up is somehow standard for competitive parks, how do you explain Europa Park? Alton Towers? Thorpe Park? Port Aventura? Disney? Dollywood? Either Busch Gardens? Six Flags Great America? Six Flags Great Adventure? Six Flags Over Texas? Canada's Wonderland?

The patterns you are describing are - for the most part - like the rings of a tree. It's just evidence of industry fads from the last few decades. Bigger, wealthier parks tend to add attractions more frequently and have more money, so it's no surprise that they're the ones that fill more of these "slots." It has nothing to do with being competitive, it's simply a byproduct of building coasters often. If a park doesn't have one, that doesn't mean there's some deficiency in the lineup, it just means they happened to not get one when they were in vogue. And if the park really is competitive, their major additions are most often going to be coasters that ARE in vogue, so... don't hold your breath for a racer at Canada's Wonderland, basically.

Ten years ago flying coasters and rocket coasters were the big thing, not so much now. Fifteen years ago it was floorless coasters and CCIs. Now it's wingriders and RMCs.

If there are any categories, they're more like "kiddie coaster," "family coaster," "thrilling coaster."
 
^I think thats why we see "diversification", not so much because there is some magic list that the parks need to check off.

I bet if the stat guy who breaks down rides by country and maker, broke down US rides by ride type you would see a large % of ride types get built within a 10 year period (or less), usually when they are new technology.

Just off the top of my head:

Standups circa 1992-1996
Inverts circa 1994-2000
Hypers circa 1999-2006
Flyers circa 2002-2008
and Wing Riders circa 2011-???

EDIT

I went ahead and made these charts, can anyone help me post them?
 
You both make good points, and it's definitely true that advances and trends in the industry lead to diverse ride lineups. However, it's worth noting that parks that build these lineups set a sort of standard for other parks to follow.

Take the B&M invert for example. During the 90s, tons of these things were built at parks around the world. The large number of inverts from that time period are a product of inverted coasters being popular. However, since they have become so widespread, they are now a staple of large amusement parks everywhere. Parks that didn't gain one during this period are still building them today. King's Island lacked an inverted coaster, so they filled this "gap" in their lineup with Banshee. SFFT built Goliath in 2008. Inverts weren't the super popular ride type at the time they were built, but they were added to these parks to help round out their lineups in an area they lacked.

You could say similar things about hyper coasters. The largest number of hyper coasters built was probably the late 90s and early 2000s, when the ride type was a very popular thing to build. They're not a common project these days, but some parks (such as KI and Carowinds) have added them in recent years to round out the park lineups.

Actually, 3 of the last 4 B&M hypers built have been at Cedar Fair parks. I interpret this as a push to get their ride lineups up to par with their competitors that built this type of ride years ago.

So while it's true that whatever the new and popular ride types are can create diverse lineups, these lineups set a standard for other parks to follow. Not necessarily a magic checklist, but definitely some guidelines of what a good lineup can contain.

steel said:
If this line-up is somehow standard for competitive parks, how do you explain Europa Park? Alton Towers? Thorpe Park? Port Aventura? Disney? Dollywood? Either Busch Gardens? Six Flags Great America? Six Flags Great Adventure? Six Flags Over Texas? Canada's Wonderland?
Click to expand...

A lot of those parks are located in Europe. While they certainly are highly regarded parks, they really don't seem relevant in the discussion of how a standard coaster lineup makes a large theme park competitive in the US. Alton Towers has pretty much zero direct competition with Carowinds as far as I can tell.

The discussion of lineups really applies to large parks that focus on rides rather than theme. Disney's coaster lineup is pretty irrelevant, given that most guests are focused on theming and/or the family experience. I'd put the same argument into Dollywood, where the beauty and immersive experience of the park seem more important than a massive ride lineup.

Busch has always seemed to be a healthy medium of coasters and theming. While their lineups are small compared to some other parks, the coasters they have definitely fit into the "standard lineup" (with the dive machines being something of a signature ride).

The last four parks all have large ride lineups, and while they don't necessarily check every box on the "magical checklist," they certainly cover a lot of it. I don't think anyone's claiming that this type of list is the be-all end-all of coaster construction, but it can certainly be applied to large chain parks that focus on large coaster lineups.
 
^^You've picked the worst possible timeframe for Stand-ups. 1993,94,95 didn't see one being built. I'd say the key years for the stand-up were 1990-1992 (one built each year) and 1996-1999 (again, one built each year).

And again, with the Hyper, 6 were built in the 8 years you've mentioned whereas 7 have been built (1 under construction) in the 8 years since.

You can also argue that the Invert was extremely popular for a good decade plus. They certainly didn't tail off in 2000. They were still churning out 2 a year between 2001-2004, almost the same ratio as the previous 6 you've mentioned.

The flyer ceased in popularity in 2006, not 2008. None were built between 2006 (multiple) and 2009 (Manta).

Don't make the charts until you've gone on a fact finding mission :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top