Adventure Express

[BoddaH1994]

Ron Toomer did however design Magnum XL-200, which is an excellent ride.

[Gordon Bombay]

^ I think what you just said is common sense about the break fins on the trains below the track instead of above I wonder why arrow didnt think of that. And the track not being banked and the stress on the cars is realted cause if the track was banked there would be less swinging and less stress on the car.

Why didn't arrow think of that? Well, remember this. Ron Toomer was a lazy designer. It's obvious in the horrid transitions that most arrows have. Not to mention, he basically bent a coat hanger and said wow, I designed a loop.

Lazy designer? Like you could do any better?... In reguards to the transistions, The newest multi-looper from Arrow is Tennessee Tornado and that opened up in 99! So if they are rough now, how well they are maintained has alot to do with it. And don't even get me started on the technological breakthroughs that have occured in the past 20 years in terms of train design, maintenance techniques, steel fabrication, and the overall coaster design process....Oh and if you honestly believe he designed customers rides from coat hangers then you are an idiot.

Please quote me where I said I could do better. Too bad the best Arrow looper had nothing to do with Toomer. Look, I rode Vortex in its' heyday and rode it last year. It's just as bumpy as ever and I would say that KI does a stellar job of maintaining that coaster. I did some reading about Toomer's desgins and it has been greatly debated before. Yes, many of his coasters still grace many amusement parks to this day. I just can't remember exactly where I read it and the writer made a lot of sense about many things that could have been done, even back before computers, that would have made his coasters a lot smoother.

Maybe you never claimed you could do better, but if you don't have the expertise to question his methods and designs then don't call him lazy. The man made a good living designing great rides, some sucked, but a lot of them were great. Like Boddah pointed out; Magnum XL. If you don't have an experience in his field or knowledge about it then don't go criticizing him, I'm sure Ron Toomer wouldn't go on some other message boards and say "KIBeast is a lazy (whatever KIBeast does)

[KIBeast]

But, I am a lazy accountant. I do see what you are saying. However, it seems there are many armchair CEO's and managers around here and they talk all the time about how badly CF runs things. Could they do better? I would hardly think so, although no one challenges these opinions. And, I probably could have picked a better descriptive word than lazy.

Yes, Magnum XL200 is a great coaster, but that design had basically already been done. Magnum and Millennium are designed after out and back wood coasters, which have been around for a long time.

[CoasterKrazy]

^ I think what you just said is common sense about the break fins on the trains below the track instead of above I wonder why arrow didnt think of that. And the track not being banked and the stress on the cars is realted cause if the track was banked there would be less swinging and less stress on the car.

Why didn't arrow think of that? Well, remember this. Ron Toomer was a lazy designer. It's obvious in the horrid transitions that most arrows have. Not to mention, he basically bent a coat hanger and said wow, I designed a loop.

Better than crumpling a piece of paper and calling it a building, in my opinion.

I don't believe Arrow's earlier "faults" were a matter of laziness, but rather utilizing proven technology and a lack of competition. Why develop an entirely new product when its doing just fine as it is? Their coasters were selling, and were popular with park goers. Sure, Schwarzkopf was providing a better product at the same time, but his designs filled a different niche than that of Arrow.

Flash forward to the mid 90s, however, and I do believe it would be safe to assume that Arrow was being a bit lazy. With B&M and Intamin becoming major players, with obviously superior rides, Arrow should have taken the time to re-vamp their product line, rather than relying on what had served them in the past. Tennessee Tornado is apparently a great start, but one that came too late.

Why didn't Arrow think to put the brake fins on the wheel assembly, rather than the bottom of the train? I can only speculate, but I would guess it was another matter of doing what they knew best; all of their previous coaster relied on brake fins mounted on the bottom of the train, and it had worked. Perhaps they believed that the moments (Force x distance) created by a deeper car configuration would be better handled by the more substantial wheel assemblies, rather than the car bodies. That seems to be fairly understandable, in my opinion. A bit shortsighted, but understandable nonetheless. I have the advantage of hindsight, so I can't say that I wouldn't have made the same mistake.

[AZ Kinda Guy]

Magnum and Millennium are designed after out and back wood coasters, which have been around for a long time.

Hm thats funny. I could have swore they each had their own unique deisgn. Mind showing us which 200 foot and 300 foot wood coasters they were designed after?

[PKIVortex]

I'm sure he doesn't mean an actual 200 or 300 foot out and back Woodie. I think all he was saying, is that the layouts of the hyper and mega coasters were inspired by the old time Woodie out and backs.

[JacksonPKI]

Ron Toomer was a lazy designer.

*Gridding My Teeth*

As said in earlier posts, who designed the:

Magnum? Tennessee Tornado? Vortex? Top Gun? Corkscrew? Loch Ness Monster? Steel Phantom?

Sure he had his downs,

But he was not lazy.

[gnarkiller]

I wish it would have more drops because the second chain lift gets you all pumped up and then you just go into a station.

[King Maple The Tree King]

Ron Toomer was a lazy designer.

*Gridding My Teeth*

As said in earlier posts, who designed the:

Magnum? Tennessee Tornado? Vortex? Top Gun? Corkscrew? Loch Ness Monster? Steel Phantom?

Sure he had his downs,

But he was not lazy.

Actually other people brought up those points, not you.

[KIBeast]

Magnum and Millennium are designed after out and back wood coasters, which have been around for a long time.

Hm thats funny. I could have swore they each had their own unique deisgn. Mind showing us which 200 foot and 300 foot wood coasters they were designed after?

I'm sorry. Where did I say that they matched wood coasters height? Nowhere. The basic model of a large first hill followed by air time hills. They're modeled after out and back coasters.

[AZ Kinda Guy]

Magnum and Millennium are designed after out and back wood coasters, which have been around for a long time.

Hm thats funny. I could have swore they each had their own unique deisgn. Mind showing us which 200 foot and 300 foot wood coasters they were designed after?

I'm sorry. Where did I say that they matched wood coasters height? Nowhere. The basic model of a large first hill followed by air time hills. They're modeled after out and back coasters.

With that theory, couldn't the same be said for every steel coaster without an inversion?

[KIBeast]

Magnum would be the best example of this. Theoretically, yes. Realistically, no. Not all steel coasters without inversions have an out-n-back type layout. But, that is where the design came from. Most hypers have the out-n-back basic design. Other examples; Behemoth, Nitro, Apollo's Chariot, Magnum XL200, Steel Dragon 2000, Goliath, Titan, Steel Force, Fujiyama. I'm sure there's a few more, just can't remember all of them.

Steel coasters without inversions not modeled after out-n-backs; Phantom's Revenge(although originally a looper), Flashback (SFMM), or even Backlot: Stunt Coaster.

[AZ Kinda Guy]

Thats good and all but I just can't buy the argument that a good number of the non looping steel coasters were modeled after woodys that go out and back. Each one is a unique design that have little to no resemblance of wood coasters.

[KIBeast]

In your opinion the hyper coasters don't resemble wooden coasters. That's not to say that they do or don't. That was just a little info. I heard years ago. And of course, each design is going to be unique in some way. By your logic then, all wood out and back coasters would have to be exactly the same. And, we all know that they don't have to be clones of each other to basically be doing the same thing.

[DiSab]

As said in earlier posts, who designed the:

Magnum? Tennessee Tornado? Vortex? Top Gun? Corkscrew? Loch Ness Monster? Steel Phantom?

Actually I don't believe that Ron Toomer was involved in Tennessee Tornado. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, though.

And about some steelies resembling woodies, I can see the connection. Steel out-and-back coasters take on the same general formula as wooden out-and-backers, albeit usually to a much greater height and length. Take Maggie and Blue Streak at CP, for example. Both have a large (in comparison to the rest of the ride) first hill, followed by several airtime hills, then a turnaround, more airtime hills, and the final brake run sequence of elements. While some might have some extras thrown in there, or a different kind of turnaround, they all follow the same general principle of lift-hills-turnaround-hills-station. The same can be said of steel twisters and wooden twisters.

[DropZone99]

In your opinion the hyper coasters don't resemble wooden coasters. That's not to say that they do or don't. That was just a little info. I heard years ago. And of course, each design is going to be unique in some way. By your logic then, all wood out and back coasters would have to be exactly the same. And, we all know that they don't have to be clones of each other to basically be doing the same thing.

Alot of hyper coasters resemble the old out and back wodies, like Goliath (SFOG) and Magnum XL-200 but then again some aren't, like Wild Thing or Nitro. i think that most HYPER coasters... not non-looping coasters resemble the out and back coasters because most of the time they are.

[PKIVortex]

As said in earlier posts, who designed the:

Magnum? Tennessee Tornado? Vortex? Top Gun? Corkscrew? Loch Ness Monster? Steel Phantom?

Actually I don't believe that Ron Toomer was involved in Tennessee Tornado. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, though.

And about some steelies resembling woodies, I can see the connection. Steel out-and-back coasters take on the same general formula as wooden out-and-backers, albeit usually to a much greater height and length. Take Maggie and Blue Streak at CP, for example. Both have a large (in comparison to the rest of the ride) first hill, followed by several airtime hills, then a turnaround, more airtime hills, and the final brake run sequence of elements. While some might have some extras thrown in there, or a different kind of turnaround, they all follow the same general principle of lift-hills-turnaround-hills-station. The same can be said of steel twisters and wooden twisters.

Yes your right Ron Toomer wasn't involved in TT. He was already retired by then.

[JacksonPKI]

As said in earlier posts, who designed the:

Magnum? Tennessee Tornado? Vortex? Top Gun? Corkscrew? Loch Ness Monster? Steel Phantom?

Actually I don't believe that Ron Toomer was involved in Tennessee Tornado. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, though.

He wasn't? I could have sworn,