Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Thorpe Park | Hyperia | Mack Hyper Coaster | 2024

CrashCoaster said:
For anyone interested, here is an accurate re-creation of B&M's bid for the coaster, accurate to the overhead plans, made by Jamie Rogers (Jambles), the guy who made the accurate pre-creation I posted further up the page.


This layout comes out 1,297m (4,255ft) long. While I do prefer the Mack bid personally, I am curious why it is so much shorter than this hyper. As far as B&M hypers go, it looks fairly generic to me but it would've solved the UK airtime issue.
Click to expand...
Look so tediously 'boring' next to the chosen option... So pleased they didn't go with this, it wouldn't stand any chance of being the best hyper in Europe.

Having said that, it's length seems a little better, and I would like to think that they'd have thrown in a few more variances of airtime hill, not just straight hills over and over with one banked hill plonked in right at the end. Guess we'll never know that for sure, unless we get more than the top down!
 
Noice, interesting to me how the B&m proposal ended up into a twister section at the end
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't PortAventura and Barcelona the UK's playground for holidays? Would have Thorpe adding a coaster similar to Shambhala impacted peoples opinion on it since they're so similar? Me as an uncultured American guy, I started to be thinking this cuz I realized about how Barcelona's a huge destination for Bri'ish, and PortAventura is in a perfect position seen as it was meant to fill the void in the Disney theme park that never was to attract all those Britons, so maybe Brits contrast it with Thorpe Park... might be dumb question, just interested in clarifying!
 
I definitely prefer the proposed idea of Exodus to another B&M hyper. I’d much rather get something you can’t get anywhere else, rather than something that’s widely abundant globally.

I can’t see many more B&M hypers being made across popular western parks - they are (I presume) expensive + (in any case) old hat compared to more cost effective options.

… and presumably the decision at Thorpe was in part based on price.
 
CrashCoaster said:
For anyone interested, here is an accurate re-creation of B&M's bid for the coaster, accurate to the overhead plans, made by Jamie Rogers (Jambles), the guy who made the accurate pre-creation I posted further up the page.


This layout comes out 1,297m (4,255ft) long. While I do prefer the Mack bid personally, I am curious why it is so much shorter than this hyper. As far as B&M hypers go, it looks fairly generic to me but it would've solved the UK airtime issue.
Click to expand...

I think I prefer the look of this tbh, the uk doesn't need another short looping coaster, just give us some pure airtime with a pretty substantial ride length. Yes what we're getting looks more unique and as a goon it's exciting, but thinking from a GP perspective the B&M would have done better imo due to how unique to the UK it would be and how we know a B&M are reliable good rides, most people haven't been PA so the only large non looping coaster they know is the Big One, which is ****e, even if they don't know it as they haven't been exposed to anything else.
 
Nitefly said:
I definitely prefer the proposed idea of Exodus to another B&M hyper. I’d much rather get something you can’t get anywhere else, rather than something that’s widely abundant globally.

I can’t see many more B&M hypers being made across popular western parks - they are (I presume) expensive + (in any case) old hat compared to more cost effective options.

… and presumably the decision at Thorpe was in part based on price.
Click to expand...
Aren't Mack expensive anyway, would what we're getting really be that much different in price to a b&m, the support structure for the drop and dive loop is way more substantial than what b&m hypers get nowadays?

Sorry for the double post Mods
 
I'm glad they've went with the Mack coaster. It looks much more unique whilst still having some moments of airtime (we'll see how good the airtime is once it's open of course). Like Ricky had mentioned, we have a B&M Hyper only a few hours away in Spain (of the best ones too), and it's only really going to be us enthusiasts who are wanting an airtime focused coaster as such.

The big appeal for the GP on this one will be the height, and possibly the huge inversions on it. Whereas with a B&M Hyper (as good as they are, I mean, my top coaster is one), I'd imagine the GP to find them slightly more 'boring', as they are mainly just airtime hills with some twisted sections (to summarise).
 
Matt N said:
I also feel that the B&M proposal would have filled more of a gap within Thorpe Park’s lineup; a non-inverting, rerideable thrill coaster
Click to expand...

I agree with Matt on this.

One time I visited Thorpe and started getting dizzy after riding all the coasters. At that moment I remember wishing there was a coaster fitting into the "fun but not too intense or inversion-y" category.

In addition, aesthetically, the B&M coaster would've added a touch of elegance - something I feel Thorpe lacks.
 
Give me the Mack over the B&M any day of the week - B&M just followed the same formula that they have done for the last 20 years to produce something that is basically the same concept as most of the existing 18 B&M hypers and is completely insignificant/forgettable on the global stage. As a result I found the POV pretty boring.

The Mack is really "out there" - it's short and it's ugly, but completely unlike anything else in the world, and some of those elements (especially the outer bank turn into roll) are going to make us feel things we've never felt before.

Don't get me wrong, if they'd unveiled the B&M concept I would have been very happy with it, but this Mack is going to be something else :).
 
The Mack could have been something else in my opinion. Instead they cheaped out and went with a dive machine length layout with a couple of fancy out there elements.

Still can't be anything but disappointed myself. I'm fine with them getting something else other than a B&M hyper but don't half ass it if you are.
 
Comparing both concepts, I prefer MACK's take on Exodus. While the B&M proposal would've been one of the best coasters in the UK as well, I could see British enthusiasts comparing it as an "inferior version" of Shambhala/Mako - meanwhile, MACK's proposal is incredibly distinct and innovative, with nothing quite like it in the entire Western hemisphere. Yes, MACK's take is definitely shorter, though I suspect it's because the B&M proposal had much more space to work with - it extends over the pond, lake, nearby pathways and into Slammer's old footprint - and MACK's layout is noticeably higher off the ground, which massively increases support costs. Though it's not the longest ride ever, I'm confident that Exodus will be among the best coasters in the world when it opens.
 
The Mack would have been perfect if it had like an extra 750 to 1k ft of low twisty bits that focuses on air time (+ a barrel roll) after the dive loop, they certainly have the space at the back end of the ride to do so.
 
I'd be amazed if the capacity for this would be any good btw which is another reason why the B&M looks better imo, the queues at Thorpe are vile enough as it is and the park will be busy when this is opened.
 
If the throughput is anything like colossus (which I doubt it will be) then they'll get a train out every 3 minutes. That was how long it took them to get a train out last Tuesday it was disgraceful, considering that Colossus is one of the more popular rides among the GP its incredible how long it takes them to get a train loaded. Hourly throughput of 560 guests which really is not okay, so I hope that they can get better dispatch times for this to help throughput.
 
I worked out on a previous page that it is likely the coaster will run a 3 train operation with a block setup similar to Wicker Man. That has a decent throughout with decent operations so I'm not too worried.
 
Melons said:
If the throughput is anything like colossus (which I doubt it will be) then they'll get a train out every 3 minutes. That was how long it took them to get a train out last Tuesday it was disgraceful, considering that Colossus is one of the more popular rides among the GP its incredible how long it takes them to get a train loaded. Hourly throughput of 560 guests which really is not okay, so I hope that they can get better dispatch times for this to help throughput.
Click to expand...
Colossus is quite a unique situation capacity-wise. I think those trains and bulky restraints create quite a unique scenario for the ride staff to grapple with, which is a problem that Exodus shouldn’t have if Mack’s other coasters are anything to go by.

Stealth is a coaster with 20-seat trains in the same park, and that’s gotten a solid 850pph both times I’ve timed it recently. And even that’s with bulkier restraints and less roomy trains than Exodus will likely have.

Personally, I think Exodus will attain the best part of 1,000pph, if not over 1,000pph.
 
Sorry to double post, but I was thinking about the “B&M proposal vs the Exodus we’re getting” debate that has been raging in this thread. I had an interesting thought.

And my thought was; I think you could make a solid argument for Exodus’ uniqueness and suitability compared to the B&M proposal within both the world and Thorpe Park being somewhat of a double edged sword.

I’d argue that Exodus is more unique within the world at large, but less unique within Thorpe Park. Its layout choices and elements appear very unique on a worldwide scale, but it shares the same basic design paradigm as most of Thorpe Park’s other thrill coasters (sit-down looping coaster). Exodus appears very different to anything else in the world, but at the same time, it doesn’t do too much differently from many of Thorpe’s other thrill rides.

On the other hand, I’d argue that the B&M proposal was less unique within the world at large, but more unique within Thorpe Park. Many B&M Hypers exist worldwide, many of which share very similar layouts to the B&M proposal, but that type of experience is something that is definitely lacking from Thorpe Park and arguably the wider UK industry, and I’d argue that on a park level, the B&M proposal would have filled more of a notable void in Thorpe’s lineup than Exodus will.

It’s an interesting one! My personal take is that I would have been thrilled with either, and I’m pleased as punch with the ride being built, but the B&M proposal appears on the face of it to be more my cup of tea.
 
It's no surprise to see Merlin go for the more 'Gimmicky' option of the two. However unlike most Merlin gimmicks this one looks to be worthwhile.

Would I have personally chosen the B&M option? Sure. We know what we would be getting with that, a solid airtime filled coaster which you can't really go wrong with. However the layout wasn't the out and back along the old railroad that we all wanted so it would have still disappointed many.

This Mack I have no idea how it's going to ride, it could be incredible, it could ride horrible and it's short.. Either way I really believe the huge outer bank into the downward roll element (Does it have a name?) Has the potential to be one the best elements in the UK. The B&M didn't have any potential like that.

So yeah, the Mack is definitely the unique, riskier and more gimmicky of the two options but therefore the more intriguing and interesting too.
 
spicy said:
Either way I really believe the huge outer bank into the downward roll element (Does it have a name?) Has the potential to be one the best elements in the UK.
Click to expand...
It's been dubbed the "gender roll" by the guy on NL2 Discord who created the element, who inspired Lenny, Exodus' designer, to put the element on the ride (it was first seen on an RMC hybrid, funnily enough).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top