Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Blue Fire, seriously?

For what it's worth, I rode Helix and then Blue Fire, and wasn't overly impressed with the latter. It's a good ride, one of the better ones Ive been on, but it doesn't hold up to Helix at all.

I've also not got much hope for Icon being anything amazing, especially nothing that can hold a torch to Helix. It's the sort of solid coaster that adds to a park in quantity but not necessarily quality.
 
I like Blue Fire but I don't love it simply because of the lost momentum. For me it is a good ride but not a great ride.
 
Will said:
pretty much marks the time that Mack threw down the gauntlet to the likes of Intamin and declared 'No... THIS is how you build a launched coaster'. Unlike their rivals, they made the launch process a comfortable one, and happily for us, they've never looked back.
Click to expand...

Lol wut? Blue Fire is absolute forceless garbage, and most of the Intamin launches I've ridden smash it to pieces... heck even Rita is better than Blue Fire.
 
Martyn B said:
Lol wut? Blue Fire is absolute forceless garbage, and most of the Intamin launches I've ridden smash it to pieces... heck even Rita is better than Blue Fire.
Click to expand...
If you ask me a coaster fan shouldn't rate a coaster only by its force. I love pretty much all coasters and they can be fun even if they are not that forceful. Blue Fire is supposed to be a family friendly coaster. If it's not intense enough for you, that's okay, but just because your expectations are off that doesn't mean it's a bad coaster. The way you bash it is unfair and uncalled for.
 
Ireeb said:
If you ask me a coaster fan shouldn't rate a coaster only by its force. I love pretty much all coasters and they can be fun even if they are not that forceful. Blue Fire is supposed to be a family friendly coaster. If it's not intense enough for you, that's okay, but just because your expectations are off that doesn't mean it's a bad coaster. The way you bash it is unfair and uncalled for.
Click to expand...

I second this. Also... Rita?! Better than Blufi? Noooo...
 
The way I bash it is unfair and uncalled for?! Lol, when did CF become such a sensitive place?

People repeatedly bash Millennium at FI for being uneventful and dull, and I agree. But that's also how I see Blue Fire, so I don't get how what I'm saying is "uncalled for". I'm talking about a coaster here, not your grandma.

And I like family coasters anyway, I really enjoy the likes of BTM and Pegase Express, so that's not a valid argument really.

Rita is better than BF for the launch alone. BF is just forceless, dull and feels like it's going to stall like 3 times. Weakest launch I've ever done too. I just do not understand why people rant and rave about it being so amazing.
 
Martyn B said:
The way I bash it is unfair and uncalled for?! Lol, when did CF become such a sensitive place?

People repeatedly bash Millennium at FI for being uneventful and dull, and I agree. But that's also how I see Blue Fire, so I don't get how what I'm saying is "uncalled for". I'm talking about a coaster here, not your grandma.

And I like family coasters anyway, I really enjoy the likes of BTM and Pegase Express, so that's not a valid argument really.

Rita is better than BF for the launch alone. BF is just forceless, dull and feels like it's going to stall like 3 times. Weakest launch I've ever done too. I just do not understand why people rant and rave about it being so amazing.
Click to expand...
Sensitive? You sound like Blue Fire offended you and you can't get over it, so you need to have a good cry here.
Blue Fire is supposed to be a coaster to introduce people to more intense coasters with inversions. It looks scary but is actually not too intense. Europa-Park wants to remain family oriented and that's why they don't want to overstrain their guests, since there are still many young guests. If the coaster was too intense, they might be scared of it and never come back.
Comparing it to most intense Intamin coasters is unfair, because it is not supposed to be competition to it.
The coaster is not bad, you just fail to see it like it is.
 
^ Still, they could of made a family coaster that isn't designed to lose momentum and have a complete lack of force. Blue Fire seems to be awkwardly in between family and thrill in a sort of coaster purgatory where it actually achieves little as a thrill coaster or a family coaster. Good family coasters usually have some decent forces and momentum/pace.

That's how I see Blue Fire without the experience of riding it, so of course my opinion isn't based on real experience and could easily change after riding. Not sure if I'd put Blue Fire below Rita though, as Rita is total garbage. I don't equate force or speed to automatically mean good and I think Blue Fire's layout (beyond the stall turn) looks better than Rita's. I understand that Mack launch coasters aren't really centred on the launch, it's just an alternative way of creating momentum instead of being chain/cable lifted up and dropped from a height.
 
Sandman said:
^ Still, they could of made a family coaster that isn't designed to lose momentum and have a complete lack of force. Blue Fire seems to be awkwardly in between family and thrill in a sort of coaster purgatory where it actually achieves little as a thrill coaster or a family coaster. Good family coasters usually have some decent forces and momentum/pace.

That's how I see Blue Fire without the experience of riding it, so of course my opinion isn't based on real experience and could easily change after riding. Not sure if I'd put Blue Fire below Rita though, as Rita is total garbage. I don't equate force or speed to automatically mean good and I think Blue Fire's layout (beyond the stall turn) looks better than Rita's. I understand that Mack launch coasters aren't really centred on the launch, it's just an alternative way of creating momentum instead of being chain/cable lifted up and dropped from a height.
Click to expand...
It has a lot of focus on the inversions, on my first ride (and my first inversions ever) I still found the inversions very intense and I was glad that the parts in between give you a second to recollect.
 
I'm a firm Blue Fire fan. Yes, it's been superceded by Helix but that's hardly a bad thing and the junior doesn't detract from the original. Yes Blue Fire is also very short but everything it does it does well and the shortness means that there are no dead spots.
It's not overly forceful but, instead, just fun. It's just perfect for afternoon rerides.

No way in hell is Rita better. Sorry, but Rita is boring as hell and does absolutely nothing with its layout. Maybe I should start charging to drive people quickly though a forest, it'd be more fun.
 
Rofl so much drama in here over people who can't accept people with a different opinion.

Whilst I agree that Rita's launch is more forecful than Blue Fire's, I don't like forceful launches. There's also far more to enjoy about Blue Fire even if the layout isn't the greatest.
 
Sandman said:
That's how I see Blue Fire without the experience of riding it.
Click to expand...
Well, that might actually be an issue.

Seriously, this thread have become absurd. You can say anything about Blue Fire, but you cannot deny this coaster has both airtime and serious hangtime ( well, you can always go all flat earth and no climate change, but that would make you a complete moron, right ? ).

So, no, this coaster is not completely useless. It's not about extremely high G's or thigh crushing, but it is quite good at what it does (that is, selling you natural gas, right ?). And yeah, it's a launch coaster that's not about speed, intensity or even linear acceleration.
I guess next time we are going to see people bashing Fury325 for the lack of inversions. What ? a steel coaster without inversions ? I want my money back !
 
Ireeb said:
Sensitive? You sound like Blue Fire offended you and you can't get over it, so you need to have a good cry here.
Blue Fire is supposed to be a coaster to introduce people to more intense coasters with inversions.
Click to expand...
I find it very difficult to believe that Europa Park built blue fire as a means of helping people build up the confidence to ride more intense loopers at other theme parks.
Why would Europa help their competition?
 
Gazza said:
I find it very difficult to believe that Europa Park built blue fire as a means of helping people build up the confidence to ride more intense loopers at other theme parks.
Why would Europa help their competition?
Click to expand...
Not for other parks. For roller coasters in general. To me Silver Star looked scarier than Blue Fire, since I liked Blue Fire I had more confidence to ride Silver Star. Since Blue Fire looks scary, but actually isn't, it also makes GP people proud that they dared to ride it and enjoyed it. Postive experience = they come back. Also, maybe (hopefully) they build a more intense looper in the future. I would love to see a big dipper or something like that. People who like Blue Fire are likely to come back to ride something like that as well.
 
That's a side effect. That's all a side effect. Europa went back to their roots for Blue Fire and built a prototype to sell it (The park originally was just a place where the company could sell their wagons, which became carousels, which became misc rides). It wasn't supposed to be anything other then a new type of coaster that people would buy into because of it's general appeal. It isn't intense and it's predecessors are because this one was a prototype. They had no idea how it'd ride from person to person before this, so they couldnt push the boundaries as they have done now. To a certain extent I'd believe they purposely left it a little tame just because all of europa's line up looks impressive but ride's a bit dully, and it wouldn't surprise me if Europa wanted to help other European parks because they're all in a merry little circle jerk, but it simply isn't the case. Blue Fire is just a bit dull and it happens to do everything else.
 
toofpikk said:
That's a side effect. That's all a side effect. Europa went back to their roots for Blue Fire and built a prototype to sell it (The park originally was just a place where the company could sell their wagons, which became carousels, which became misc rides). It wasn't supposed to be anything other then a new type of coaster that people would buy into because of it's general appeal. It isn't intense and it's predecessors are because this one was a prototype. They had no idea how it'd ride from person to person before this, so they couldnt push the boundaries as they have done now. To a certain extent I'd believe they purposely left it a little tame just because all of europa's line up looks impressive but ride's a bit dully, and it wouldn't surprise me if Europa wanted to help other European parks because they're all in a merry little circle jerk, but it simply isn't the case. Blue Fire is just a bit dull and it happens to do everything else.
Click to expand...
Of course, you are completely right. I didn't mean to say it's the main idea behind Blue Fire. I just exaggerated on it because of the previous comment. In general, they wanted to be careful with the intensity of Blue Fire, for several reasons. They wanted to make sure they neither overstrain the ride itself since it was the first of its kind for Mack, nor the riders so they a) come back for more (my point) and b) it appeals to a big number of people which is both good for the park and a selling point for Mack Rides.
 
balrog said:
Well, that might actually be an issue.

Seriously, this thread have become absurd. You can say anything about Blue Fire, but you cannot deny this coaster has both airtime and serious hangtime ( well, you can always go all flat earth and no climate change, but that would make you a complete moron, right ? ).

So, no, this coaster is not completely useless. It's not about extremely high G's or thigh crushing, but it is quite good at what it does (that is, selling you natural gas, right ?). And yeah, it's a launch coaster that's not about speed, intensity or even linear acceleration.
I guess next time we are going to see people bashing Fury325 for the lack of inversions. What ? a steel coaster without inversions ? I want my money back !
Click to expand...


What might be an issue? That I have an opinion of Blue Fire without riding? Of course, I said my opinion is based on not riding but on how it looks and could easily change after riding. Everyone has opinions of rides prior to riding, hence being an enthusiast. Also I'm failing to see the absurdity of subjective opinions! ;) But very well.
 
MartynB said:
The BPB fanboys are obviously already calling it the world's best coaster but I think most people understand that'll just be good fun. I know speed isn't everything, but for a double launch coaster to only have a top speed of 43mph... it's a bit slow)
Click to expand...

Are they? Where? I probably speak to as many BPB fans as anyone else given what I do with Club PBE and yes there is a lot of hype but nobody is expecting it to be a world beater, we are hyped that our favourite park is getting a new coaster which will probably be the best the Pleasure Beach will have to offer and many of us have wanted a launched coaster for years in the space that Icon is going into.

I've been on Helix recently, it increased my excitement for going on Icon a lot, the airtime hill going under the Big One will feel like a very near miss!

Blue Fire and Europa Park? Not particularly enthusiastic about either, Blue Fire looks tame and I am not convinced I will come away from there as a fanboy like so many others have. I had been looking into going in October but the flight times are rubbish for when I want to go so I am leaving it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top