Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Thorpe Park | Hyperia | Mack Hyper Coaster | 2024

The actual airtime on Shambhala was also some of the most sustained I've experienced, and Helix has a great mix of sustained air with world class floaty hangtime.. we're getting the best of both worlds on Hyperia.
 
The Hyperia vs a B&M Hyper debate is an interesting one.

I was one of the keenest advocates for a B&M Hyper for this project. I’m a huge fan of a B&M Hyper, and I think that a non-inverting, straight airtime machine of that ilk could have filled a big hole in the lineups of both Thorpe Park and the wider UK industry. I dare say that even Hyperia as we are receiving it may not fill that hole, as it inverts and does not really have much traditional straight airtime per se, even if I admit that it will still provide a real breath of fresh air to the UK industry, fill a big hole of its own and probably provide a considerable amount of negative g-forces within its various elements.

If we’re being frank; while I’m of course open to surprises, I’m not 100% convinced that I’ll necessarily like Hyperia as much as the two B&M Hypers I’ve ridden. Do I have “odd taste”? Perhaps so. As I’ve ridden more coasters, I’ve found that as utterly awesome as all the new, modern RMC-style elements with airtime in weird directions are, nothing quite beats good, traditional straight airtime for me, and B&M Hypers provide that in droves. The layout style, the restraints, the amazing sustained airtime hills, and everything else about a good B&M Hyper just really clicks with me, for some reason.

With that being said, I’m very glad that Thorpe Park went with the ride they did, and I’m not at all bitter that they didn’t go for a B&M Hyper for this, and I feel this way for multiple reasons.

The first is that while I would have loved a B&M Hyper at Thorpe Park, I don’t think that the reality of a B&M Hyper for this project would necessarily have turned out like the romanticised vision of one that myself and others were espousing during the development phase. The words “Thorpe Park B&M Hyper”, for me at least, conjure up connotations of a Thorpe Park take on Shambhala or similar; a tall, long out and back layout filled to the brim with huge airtime hills. However, with the area Thorpe Park were working with, as well as the kind of length budget that Merlin were seemingly willing to allocate, I am increasingly sceptical that it would have turned out that way. The land that Hyperia is occupying is a very confined area by hyper coaster standards, which I don’t think would have translated very well to a “conventional” B&M Hyper. I also think that had Merlin built a B&M Hyper of the same sort of length as Hyperia, it would have felt discernibly stunted. I adore B&M Hypers, but they are rides that need considerable space and considerable length to thrive, and I don’t think that either of those things could have been provided here. With this in mind, my fear is that a B&M Hyper for this project would simply have drawn unfavourable comparisons to equivalents abroad. My feeling is that a short B&M Hyper with a strange layout that tried to squeeze the “typical” B&M Hyper experience into a confined area and length would have simply been dismissed as the disappointing, “low-fat” equivalent of rides like Shambhala or Mako, in the same way that, rightly or wrongly, many other UK coasters often are. For instance, Icon is commonly deemed the disappointing, “low-fat” equivalent of rides like Helix and Taron, and Wicker Man is often deemed the disappointing, “low-fat” equivalent of rides like Wodan and Troy. My point is that a B&M Hyper built to the same brief as Hyperia would have run the risk of garnering the same unfavourable comparisons to foreign equivalents as numerous existing UK coasters gain, whereas Hyperia is something unique and totally different to anything else that makes the most of what it has and is bringing something genuinely quite ground-breaking to the table.

The second reason is that regardless of whether it appeals as much to my personal taste as a B&M Hyper layout does, this layout still looks absolutely phenomenal in its own right and has me incredibly excited! As much as I love my B&M Hypers, variety is the spice of life, and if I were to be bitter and slag off everything that wasn’t quite as much to my taste as Mako or Silver Star, then I would have a very sad and dull existence indeed. To dismiss Hyperia just because "it's not a B&M Hyper" would be to dismiss an incredibly unique and eye-catching ride that looks like it could provide an absolutely sublime experience packed with unique, impactful elements and loads of impactful airtime in all kinds of weird and wonderful directions, and that seems very close-minded to me. As much as I love a B&M Hyper, I also love numerous other rides, and when Hyperia looks like it could well slot in comfortably among those rides, why should I nitpick about it? We're still getting something that looks absolutely sublime, and I'm very glad that Thorpe Park have been bold and brought this unique and superb-looking layout into the world!

I adore a B&M Hyper and was very keen for this project to be one, but I'm comfortable with the fact that Hyperia isn't one. When the ride we're getting looks as brilliant and impactful as it does, I don't really see the point in picking flaws in it just because it's not exactly what I'd originally envisioned; I have a high amount of faith that I'll absolutely love Hyperia for what it is!
 
Matt N said:
The Hyperia vs a B&M Hyper debate is an interesting one.

I was one of the keenest advocates for a B&M Hyper for this project. I’m a huge fan of a B&M Hyper, and I think that a non-inverting, straight airtime machine of that ilk could have filled a big hole in the lineups of both Thorpe Park and the wider UK industry. I dare say that even Hyperia as we are receiving it may not fill that hole, as it inverts and does not really have much traditional straight airtime per se, even if I admit that it will still provide a real breath of fresh air to the UK industry, fill a big hole of its own and probably provide a considerable amount of negative g-forces within its various elements.

If we’re being frank; while I’m of course open to surprises, I’m not 100% convinced that I’ll necessarily like Hyperia as much as the two B&M Hypers I’ve ridden. Do I have “odd taste”? Perhaps so. As I’ve ridden more coasters, I’ve found that as utterly awesome as all the new, modern RMC-style elements with airtime in weird directions are, nothing quite beats good, traditional straight airtime for me, and B&M Hypers provide that in droves. The layout style, the restraints, the amazing sustained airtime hills, and everything else about a good B&M Hyper just really clicks with me, for some reason.

With that being said, I’m very glad that Thorpe Park went with the ride they did, and I’m not at all bitter that they didn’t go for a B&M Hyper for this, and I feel this way for multiple reasons.

The first is that while I would have loved a B&M Hyper at Thorpe Park, I don’t think that the reality of a B&M Hyper for this project would necessarily have turned out like the romanticised vision of one that myself and others were espousing during the development phase. The words “Thorpe Park B&M Hyper”, for me at least, conjure up connotations of a Thorpe Park take on Shambhala or similar; a tall, long out and back layout filled to the brim with huge airtime hills. However, with the area Thorpe Park were working with, as well as the kind of length budget that Merlin were seemingly willing to allocate, I am increasingly sceptical that it would have turned out that way. The land that Hyperia is occupying is a very confined area by hyper coaster standards, which I don’t think would have translated very well to a “conventional” B&M Hyper. I also think that had Merlin built a B&M Hyper of the same sort of length as Hyperia, it would have felt discernibly stunted. I adore B&M Hypers, but they are rides that need considerable space and considerable length to thrive, and I don’t think that either of those things could have been provided here. With this in mind, my fear is that a B&M Hyper for this project would simply have drawn unfavourable comparisons to equivalents abroad. My feeling is that a short B&M Hyper with a strange layout that tried to squeeze the “typical” B&M Hyper experience into a confined area and length would have simply been dismissed as the disappointing, “low-fat” equivalent of rides like Shambhala or Mako, in the same way that, rightly or wrongly, many other UK coasters often are. For instance, Icon is commonly deemed the disappointing, “low-fat” equivalent of rides like Helix and Taron, and Wicker Man is often deemed the disappointing, “low-fat” equivalent of rides like Wodan and Troy. My point is that a B&M Hyper built to the same brief as Hyperia would have run the risk of garnering the same unfavourable comparisons to foreign equivalents as numerous existing UK coasters gain, whereas Hyperia is something unique and totally different to anything else that makes the most of what it has and is bringing something genuinely quite ground-breaking to the table.

The second reason is that regardless of whether it appeals as much to my personal taste as a B&M Hyper layout does, this layout still looks absolutely phenomenal in its own right and has me incredibly excited! As much as I love my B&M Hypers, variety is the spice of life, and if I were to be bitter and slag off everything that wasn’t quite as much to my taste as Mako or Silver Star, then I would have a very sad and dull existence indeed. To dismiss Hyperia just because "it's not a B&M Hyper" would be to dismiss an incredibly unique and eye-catching ride that looks like it could provide an absolutely sublime experience packed with unique, impactful elements and loads of impactful airtime in all kinds of weird and wonderful directions, and that seems very close-minded to me. As much as I love a B&M Hyper, I also love numerous other rides, and when Hyperia looks like it could well slot in comfortably among those rides, why should I nitpick about it? We're still getting something that looks absolutely sublime, and I'm very glad that Thorpe Park have been bold and brought this unique and superb-looking layout into the world!

I adore a B&M Hyper and was very keen for this project to be one, but I'm comfortable with the fact that Hyperia isn't one. When the ride we're getting looks as brilliant and impactful as it does, I don't really see the point in picking flaws in it just because it's not exactly what I'd originally envisioned; I have a high amount of faith that I'll absolutely love Hyperia for what it is!
Click to expand...
B&M hypers are good but there’s already so many and they’re all very similar. But I can’t think of any other coaster with an outer bank that goes into a downhill roll
 
I am sad that i think this was the UKs only chance for a B&M hyper but we saw their bid and personally Macks was the better. If it was the other way around i think there would be complaining about a basic layout and it not being long enough (compared to other B&M hypers).

I would have loved a big sprawling layout but the only place that may have worked would be along the back of the park which im not sure they could do even if they wanted.

I would have loved a Shambhala or Dc rivals but considering the space they had to work with, cost, UK planning and it to break the height and speed record im very happy with what we have coming.
 
To be honest, I’m really glad it isn’t a B&M hyper. We would have received a most likely sub par B&M hyper, that no doubtedly wouldn’t live up to its closest counterpart Shambhala, or to Mako which is the other coaster British tourists are probably more familiar with.

With this we are getting something completely unique, a layout like no other coaster in the world. The layout while short, is great, unique elements, airtime, and one of the craziest looking first drops ever built. I’m fully expecting it to be the best coaster in the UK by a mile. I’m not bothered it’s short, as long as it packs a punch in the layout it has.
 
Trax said:
Zadra never slows down, and if you have a closer look at the shaping of its hills, Hyperion is also quite fast even on their crests.
Hyperia has 2 drawn out inversions + the outwarded banked inversion thingy which each extend the ride time by a decent amount.
I feel like Mack has tried their best to artificially extend the duration as much as possible, but this does not distract from the fact that the ride really just has 5 elements (drop, both turnarounds, the outward-inversion thingy and the wave-turn). For comparison, Zadra has 9 and Hyperion has 11 (not counting curves connecting the respective elements).
Click to expand...
Element counting huh?

Fun fact, Pepsi Max Big One has them all beat on both number of elements and ride time. ;)

Niles said:
I am sad that i think this was the UKs only chance for a B&M hyper but we saw their bid and personally Macks was the better. If it was the other way around i think there would be complaining about a basic layout and it not being long enough (compared to other B&M hypers).

I would have loved a big sprawling layout but the only place that may have worked would be along the back of the park which im not sure they could do even if they wanted.

I would have loved a Shambhala or Dc rivals but considering the space they had to work with, cost, UK planning and it to break the height and speed record im very happy with what we have coming.
Click to expand...
Despite being firmly in the "I've ridden too many B&M Hypers, and there's way too many still to ride, I'd rather have something 'unique' in the UK" camp... This (most likely) fact is just saddening.

I'd love a B&M Hyper in the UK, they're great rides... It's just that, given this will most likely be the only hyper built here in the next 10 years, we'd rather have something innovative than a ride type we can easily ride elsewhere whenever we want to.
 
Last edited:
Nicky Borrill said:
Element counting huh?

Fun fact, Pepsi Max Big One has them all beat on both number of elements and ride time. ;)
Click to expand...
This fact, for me at least, reinforces my view that length is not everything and that Hyperia could quite easily still be an awesome ride.

Despite The Big One being the longest of the six 200ft+ coasters I’ve ridden (and indeed the longest coaster I’ve ridden full stop), it is my least favourite by a significant margin. The other five all make my top 20, and even the next lowest ranked 200ft+ coaster, Stealth, only just misses my top 10 (it’s at #12), whereas The Big One isn’t even in my top 50% and sits at #72 out of the 111 coasters I’ve ridden. I don’t know how popular this is, but my view is that while it’s a very long ride, I find it too rough for my liking and I feel that it doesn’t really do an awful lot with its great size and length.

When I take that into account, I’m much happier that we’re receiving a coaster like Hyperia that is short, but really utilises its length, than I would have been had we received a coaster like The Big One that was long but massively under-utilised its length.
 
When comparing the Mack proposal and the B&M proposal for this coaster I think the Mack option was a no brainer.

The B&M proposal we have seen wasn’t anything special at all, whereas this is pretty special and unique from Mack.

There was clearly a lot of restrictions on the area, as we know they even had a lot of problems getting the current layout through.

I do wonder if B&M did inversions on their Hypers maybe Thorpe would have gone with B&M.

They may have even approached Mack after seeing the underwhelming layout of the B&M, as everything pointed to this being a B&M hyper up until we saw the plans revealed.
 
I was initially in the disappointed camp but then I remember how most of the CF Live group - myself included - in 2016 thought nothing of Lost Gravity before riding it, but came off shocked and singing its praises.

Do I still wish it was at least a couple of elements longer? Absolutely. But Walibi Holland really struck gold with Lost Gravity and considering Hyperia is basically a Mack Big Dipper on steroids I don't think we have anything to worry about.
 
Matt N said:
The Hyperia vs a B&M Hyper debate is an interesting one.

I was one of the keenest advocates for a B&M Hyper for this project. I’m a huge fan of a B&M Hyper, and I think that a non-inverting, straight airtime machine of that ilk could have filled a big hole in the lineups of both Thorpe Park and the wider UK industry. I dare say that even Hyperia as we are receiving it may not fill that hole, as it inverts and does not really have much traditional straight airtime per se, even if I admit that it will still provide a real breath of fresh air to the UK industry, fill a big hole of its own and probably provide a considerable amount of negative g-forces within its various elements.
Click to expand...
This is where I'm at with Hyperia. Does it give the UK the big long traditional airtime machine it's been sorely lacking for so long? No, and while this project, with its focus on the height record, would've been the perfect opportunity to do it, I think we'll still get something like that eventually, even without such high stats. (I'll have my fingers crossed for a GCI behind The Swarm over the next few years.) But with the park not getting a new coaster in over a decade, and with all the advancements in coaster design made in that time, I think the park would've been remiss not to go a bit wild and unique. Yeah, it's a bit of a shame that they didn't squeeze in an extra turn and a double-down or something before the final brake, but I think that what's there is enough for a satisfying layout.
 
1086c5186d7eb3d264c27d78b57e4ec3.jpg

c4b3395ee1655e177cc59ffcfd045be9.jpg

695a627c5bd619720d57e6d2b29b8948.jpg
 
Can't wait to see this beast rise higher and higher. Forgot this ride has a water feature as well so looking forward to how that plays out. Peeps.keep talking about B&M's proposal, does anyone has a link to it? Curious to see what they did 👀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top