Will we ever see...

[McSalsa]

Well, for the most part, Son of Beast was a flop. Sure, it worked for a while, and has its fanbase, but when the ride sends rider after rider to the hospital, is mocked by enthusiasts, and is closed down most of the time, it's a flop. While its fate remains unknown, I ask you a question: do you think we will ever see a giant wooden coaster on this scale again, or has SOB killed the entire idea? There is also a bonus poll, will loops in wooden coasters ever return?

My Opinion:

While Son of Beast has "hurt" the idea of a 200+ foot wooden coaster, I do think it's possible, but only 1 company I can think of stands a chance. Intamin. Why do I think this?

Meet Colossos @ Heide Park, in germany...

http://www.rcdb.com/988.htm

Colossos stands 196 feet tall. 4 feet taller and it would be considered a hypercoaster. Yet this coaster doesn't suffer from any of Son of Beast's problems. Why? It's a pre-fab plug & play coaster. From accounts I have heard, the coaster is steel smooth. If you cannot make it to Heide Park, then at least go ride El Toro @ Six Flags Great Adventure, which stands 181 feet tall and has been known to reach 75 miles per hour(they are running it FASTER than the design calls for...Cedar Fair would never do that! ). There is also a chance the Gravity Group might do it, but I don't seem to like the idea of that because their coasters, as good as they are, can be quite rough (I have heard Voyage described as "abusive boyfriend/girlfriend you can't get enough of!" before) and if that style of coaster went over 200 feet, it could be just as bad as Son of Beast if not worse.

This is all just theory, but I do think it could work. If Son of Beast does get removed, hopefully Cedar Fair will put a Intamin Plug & Play Hypercoaster in its place for us shortly afterwords.

As for loops...yes, that IS possible. Just don't make the loop so big the train has to be ultra-heavy to "do" it. That means that it is possible, but not beyond a certain size. I would also suggest having steel supports on such a coaster.

Sorry for the long post. If you don't like my polls...why did you click the polls section!?!?

[McSalsa]

Oh, on another subject, I do also wonder if a existing coaster (Son of Beast, cough cough) could be CONVERTED into a Plug & Play via retracking? It seems possible, and might work wonders for Son of Beast. Just an extra thought.

[DeLorean Rider]

Boy I just love polls about Son of Beast...

Oh, on another subject, I do also wonder if a existing coaster (Son of Beast, cough cough) could be CONVERTED into a Plug & Play via retracking? It seems possible, and might work wonders for Son of Beast. Just an extra thought.

And no, the answer is no. The only company currently with pre-fabricated wood coasters is Intamin and believe me; after working with them here at Disney, I can PROMISE you they would NEVER go for such a thing. Besides, SOB's hands are just too bloody. Some reputations you just cant salvage.

[Mr. Coastermania]

it would be nice to try again with or without the sob.

[CoastersRZ]

Wood coasters do not need to be built to heights of more than 200 feet. Leave those things to steel rides like Diamondback.

Look at all the coasters that GCI has built. None of their wooden coasters stand taller than 110' high! But yet their rides are full of fun and enjoyable from start to finish. As the saying goes, bigger isn`t always better!

[DeLorean Rider]

Wood coasters do not need to be built to heights of more than 200 feet. Leave those things to steel rides like Diamondback.

Look at all the coasters that GCI has built. None of their wooden coasters stand taller than 110' high! But yet their rides are full of fun and enjoyable from start to finish. As the saying goes, bigger isn`t always better!

I agree; as I hear on a practically daily basis; it's all about design intent. To me, with wooden coasters; records, ratings, extreme G's, etc. are not an important factor in creating an exciting and fun ride experience.

Hell, thats Disney's standpoint for all rides and I certainly hope I don't have to get attendance figures to prove it works.

[CoastersRZ]

But Disney is also all about the "show" and the experience of the attractions. The actual ride hardware is just a piece that is utilized to help tell the story of the specific attraction.

But yes, most of the Disney rides are plain fun because they don`t try to be the fastest, tallest, or most intense rides. They are, to put it simply, fun rides especially given the theming and the story line packaged with the actual ride hardware.

[CoastersNSich]

Besides, SOB's hands are just too bloody. Some reputations you just cant salvage.

Yes, because there's a trial that's going on, and WLWT is doing its best to sweep that under the rug.

(of course, I was sarcastic here)

[UnrealNightmare]

Wood coasters do not need to be built to heights of more than 200 feet. Leave those things to steel rides like Diamondback.

Look at all the coasters that GCI has built. None of their wooden coasters stand taller than 110' high! But yet their rides are full of fun and enjoyable from start to finish. As the saying goes, bigger isn`t always better!

Not all GCI's are fun take Gwazi for Example. Some days it is rougher than SoB.

[touchdown62]

While SOB may be seen as a failure by some groups, I think there will be another attempt at a wooden "hypercoaster" sometime in the future. Bat was a failure as a suspended coaster, but there were many lessons learned in regards to design and engineering specs. Ride manufacturers have learned a lot about SOB... what went right, and more importantly, what went wrong and what was a total disaster. I don't see wooden hypercoasters sprouting up all over the place like suspended coasters did after Bat, but I can see someone trying a hyper woody again.

[McSalsa]

While SOB may be seen as a failure by some groups, I think there will be another attempt at a wooden "hypercoaster" sometime in the future. Bat was a failure as a suspended coaster, but there were many lessons learned in regards to design and engineering specs. Ride manufacturers have learned a lot about SOB... what went right, and more importantly, what went wrong and what was a total disaster. I don't see wooden hypercoasters sprouting up all over the place like suspended coasters did after Bat, but I can see someone trying a hyper woody again.

The Suspended Coaster wasn't a failure. It was simply replaced by a newer design- the rise of the inverted coaster is what killed it. By the time we got Flight Deck(Top Gun) in '93, all of the problems had been solved. Flight Deck isn't a maintence nightmare like The Bat was at all, and though it has some rust, it still operates very well and is an enjoyable ride. I understand, though, if you think them "failures" because they didn't turn out to be the mega thrill rides we had hoped for (though some of them are excellent "family thrill" rides). I also hope, in the future, someone sees the lignt that Suspended coasters are NOT the same as Inverts, and builds a new one. One problem though- Arrow is gone...would B&M or Intamin build a Suspended coaster...and what the heck would theirs be like!?!?

[74Gibson]

Salsa: He didn't say suspended coasters were a failure he said The Bat was a failure, which is very true. I love suspended coasters but I fear they were a passing fad, just like standups. Now we are forced to watch them dissapear one by one

[Raptor66]

Vekoma offers their own version of the swinging suspended coaster.

http://www.vekoma.com/index.php?option=com...3&Itemid=00

[The Interpreter]

And, from that page, offers retrofits of existing trains (as has been done in Britain):

...Comfort and safety are combined in the padded over-the-shoulder restraints.The Suspended Coaster trains are also suitable for retro-fitting, new trains can be installed onto various Swinging Turns tracks or Suspended Coaster systems. Upgrading an existing ride with these trains will give guests a completely new ride experience for a relatively low investment.

Although of a moderate thrill level, replacing the original trains with our open seats design coaches could deliver an exiting change to the rides' experience and offer a welcome boost to your park's attendance....

Vampire at Chessington World of Adventures:

http://www.rcdb.com/784.htm?p=9942

[Buckeye Brad]

Oh, on another subject, I do also wonder if a existing coaster (Son of Beast, cough cough) could be CONVERTED into a Plug & Play via retracking? It seems possible, and might work wonders for Son of Beast. Just an extra thought.

My understanding is that this would be just as hard as putting B&M steel track onto SOB. The problem is that traditional wooden track and Intamin track must be supported differently. So they couldn't just stick Intamin track on there. They would also have to significantly modify all the supports. Truthfully, all that modification might cost more than starting from scratch.

Even if it were economically feasible, I can't imagine Intamin ever doing it because of liability.

That said, Six Flags in investing a good deal to "renovate " Texas Giant. It will be interesting to see what they are actually doing, if they succeed, and if their strategy could work for other big wooden coasters.

[74Gibson]

Are Vekoma's all family coasters? I see that they call what I consider to be inverted coasters suspended. I make the distinction that suspended coaster aswing freely while inverted coasters are fixed to the track and any lateral movement is due to track angle.

[Buckeye Brad]

(I have heard Voyage described as "abusive boyfriend/girlfriend you can't get enough of!" before) and if that style of coaster went over 200 feet, it could be just as bad as Son of Beast if not worse.

Not necessarily. I'm not a coaster engineer, but please humor me. Imagine if Voyage was exactly the same as it is today, but dig a 60 trench at the base of the first drop (154'). Now "extend" the first drop into that trench. Now you have a 214' foot drop, like Son of Beast. My understanding (and ride experience) is that the drop on Son of Beast works fine, despite its height and speed. The problem is traversing the Rose Bowl at high speed.

In theory, the Voyage train would crest the second hill and traverse the rest of the course just as it does today. The only difference is a longer and faster first drop. My point is that a wooden hypercoaster doesn't have to be rougher than any other wooden coaster, as long as the other elements (curves, turns, banks) are designed to be taken at reasonable speeds.

To answer your original question, I think the biggest barriers to another hyperwoodie / looping woodie are cost, maintenance, and the fact that steel does hyper and loops just fine. Personally, I agree with you: I'd love to see more giant wooden coasters.

[The Interpreter]

Are Vekoma's all family coasters? I see that they call what I consider to be inverted coasters suspended. I make the distinction that suspended coaster aswing freely while inverted coasters are fixed to the track and any lateral movement is due to track angle.

Well Vekoma did call those other things SLC's: Suspended Looping Coasters...see T2, for example....

[McSalsa]

(I have heard Voyage described as "abusive boyfriend/girlfriend you can't get enough of!" before) and if that style of coaster went over 200 feet, it could be just as bad as Son of Beast if not worse.

Not necessarily. I'm not a coaster engineer, but please humor me. Imagine if Voyage was exactly the same as it is today, but dig a 60 trench at the base of the first drop (154'). Now "extend" the first drop into that trench. Now you have a 214' foot drop, like Son of Beast. My understanding (and ride experience) is that the drop on Son of Beast works fine, despite its height and speed. The problem is traversing the Rose Bowl at high speed.

In theory, the Voyage train would crest the second hill and traverse the rest of the course just as it does today. The only difference is a longer and faster first drop. My point is that a wooden hypercoaster doesn't have to be rougher than any other wooden coaster, as long as the other elements (curves, turns, banks) are designed to be taken at reasonable speeds.

To answer your original question, I think the biggest barriers to another hyperwoodie / looping woodie are cost, maintenance, and the fact that steel does hyper and loops just fine. Personally, I agree with you: I'd love to see more giant wooden coasters.

Excellent points. If anyone ever does another wooden hypercoaster, I give these suggestions:

-Don't use a "Twister" style layout. Make it "a classic out and back coaster on a much bigger scale." You can have Helixes and turns, but save those for the END of the ride, when it has lost some of its speed.

-Have Intamin build it, so it can be a pre-fab. This will reduce costs and make the ride much, much smoother than most normal wooden coasters.

Of course, the end result is a "Wooden Diamondback" of sorts. It works, and you get records, but you can get the same result from a B&M Hyper for about the same price. So you would only do this for records, it seems. Though you could probably mix it up a bit (have a few helixes with tunnels near the end of the ride, etc) to make it different from its steel hypercoaster "brothers".

Just more thoughts...

[Dbfan]

Like all things pertaining to coasters, someday it will happen. IN the future, some kind of new technology will arrive and a smooth all wooden hypercoaster will be possible.

[The Interpreter]

It's possible right now....there just has to be a park willing and able to pay for it. . .

[maverick2007]

I think the wooden hypercoaster is a very feasible idea albeit an expensive one. However I think a loop on a wooden coaster will only reappear a while from now if at all.

[KI Kevin]

-Don't use a "Twister" style layout.

I think it would be kinda interesting just to look at a cyclone coaster on a 200 foot scale. Think of how neat that would look.

[CrashOverRided]

if a wooden coaster has steel supports can we truely call it a wooden coaster?? did historical wooden coasters have steel other then the track or rails? if steel is needed to support the thing then that tells me that the designers are trying to get the coast to do somthing it shouldnt do. Just my opition.

[gigacoaster2k]

Wood coasters do not need to be built to heights of more than 200 feet. Leave those things to steel rides like Diamondback.

Look at all the coasters that GCI has built. None of their wooden coasters stand taller than 110' high! But yet their rides are full of fun and enjoyable from start to finish. As the saying goes, bigger isn`t always better!

I couldn't have said it better myself. Raven at Holiday World and Blue Streak at Cedar Point are perfect examples of why wooden coasters don't need to be at staggering heights to be a great ride.

Maverick at CP is also a great example of why the same can go for steel coasters.

On another note: Voyage does give me a bit of a headache, but holy God, it's worth it.

[Erosarrow05]

Could I be so bold as to ask why wood coasters do not need to built to heights of 200 feet?

You could certainly look at all the rides available that are 110 feet tall that are 'dream machines' and be totally content thinking that height is acceptable, but it could also be said that there is a whole other echelon of wooden ride waiting to be discovered above this 200 foot barrier.

I dont know why the number 200 became the arbitrary number of choice to cap the wooden roller coaster height limit, but I have to assume that if engineered appropriately, regardless of height, one could have a superb ride experience.

I could just as easily argue that steel roller coasters have no business being over 243.9 feet but i don't. The technology and creative minds behind these thrill rides are evolving every day, which fortunately for those of you who travel the country riding roller coasters to a degree it could be considered a job, means new and exciting experiences yearly.

[gigacoaster2k]

Although I do not quite understand why the 200 foot mark has been declared a stopping point for a wooden coaster's height, I have to say without hypocrisy to my previous post that if GG or CCI built a woodie of extreme height, it could be amazing.

SOB was built by RCCoA, none of whose 7 coasters I have ever heard of.

Never had the glory of being on a GCI yet.. (one day, I hope..) so I can't make a comparison there.

Just my 2 cents.

[KI Kevin]

CCI is defunct...so that can't happen.

I've only heard of one other RCCoA, Magnus Colossus, which looks awesome.

[shark6495]

CCI is defunct...so that can't happen.

I've only heard of one other RCCoA, Magnus Colossus, which looks awesome.

I do not own this video... but I found a POV of it online... here ya go

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5u7jV0U8g0

[The Interpreter]

if a wooden coaster has steel supports can we truely call it a wooden coaster?? did historical wooden coasters have steel other then the track or rails? if steel is needed to support the thing then that tells me that the designers are trying to get the coast to do somthing it shouldnt do. Just my opition.

Ever hear of the Coney Island Cyclone in Brooklyn, New York? Or the famous Comet at The Great Escape, which was once at Crystal Beach? Just two examples of wooden coasters with steel supports. This technique has been successfully used for many, many years. And the opposite is also true. Adventure Express is a steel coaster...with wood supports...as is Gemini at Cedar Point and Cedar Creek Mine Ride...