Wooden Hypercoasters

[reddude333]

Now I know the discussion of Son of Beast often gets messy on this forum so I would rather like to address the idea of wooden hypercoasters. So currently there is not one on the planet (at least not one that is technically in existence). What do people think the probability/possibility of wooden hypercoaster entering the scene is...now I know Colossos is very close with its maximum height, but ideally I am referring to a coaster with a 200+ foot drop.* Many have told me that it seems unlikely because the trains used in one would be potentially too wearing on the track, but this problem has been somewhat addressed over the years.

Note: I know what the definition of hypercoaster is, but I am more interested in the possibility of a hypercoaster in terms of drop height.

 

[Hixee]

It strikes me as more to do with cost really.

If you were considering a wooden coaster in excess of 200ft then you've got a awful lot of wood to use to do so. Look at any of the B&M Hyper coasters, or even I305 and look how efficiently they use the supports. Having all that wood would be expensive.

Not to mention the fact that wood could be difficult to analyse structurally (in terms of grain flow etc) than steel. I just don't see it happening any time soon.

 

[furie]

The wooden coaster at Alton was meant to have a 200 foot drop, heading into the valley; which is why it was such a shame it never happened.

I do think that's the only way it's going to happen though, through terrain. Yes, it's not really a hyper coaster, but I think that it's one in spirit... If it was to ever happen...

 

[nealbie]

I'm really glad someone with as high a standing and reputation within the CF community as UC agrees with me with regards to the debatable 'wooden' feel on the Intamin pre-fabs.

They just feel for all the world (and ride) like an Intamin Hyper. There's no soul to them, they may as well be a steel coaster. This doesn't detract from their brilliance, mind. Just means I feel I can't adore them in the same way as a conventional wooden coaster with all of its quintessential charms.

Which leads me to believe, with regards to this topic, why a taller Colossos or El Toro hasn't been made just for the sake of it. It's clearly not beyond the realms of possibility for Intamin to add 10 or 20 feet in height; but at the same time is there really a paying market for just getting a height record for the sake of?

So yeah, in essence, it CAN happen - I just don't see WHY a park would feel it necessary at this time.

 

[Tim]

I'm fairly certain we'll see the wooden loop appear again before we see the hypercoaster attempt return

 

[reddude333]

All of these responses seem to be realistic, but I kinda like coasters breaking a record, just for the sake of breaking a record (call me coaster shallow or whatnot). In the coaster business being the biggest and best is often the main goal.

I don't think there is really any reason it would be hard to make a wood hypercoaster though...

I would just like to point out though, that having a height of 200+ feet OR having a drop of 200+ feet qualify a coaster to be a hypercoaster. But I think it looks more impressive to have it be both qualifying in terms of height and drop.

Wooden coasters do have a sort of nostalgic element to them, but times have changed and the face of wooden coasters is not set in stone with classic out-and-back coasters with large amounts of airtime...just saying...

I like what Intamin has done in the more recent years and I still qualify what they produce as wooden coasters even if they are smooth and lack many of the classic woodie features.

On a last note, I think another loop attempt will not show up until after the hypercoaster mark is reached...thats just my call...

 

[Dave]

Plus the footprint for a Hyper Wooden is just massive, as you have the large side supports helping to prop up the central bents.

Look at the size of Son of Beast footprint, it just tears through the woodland.

http://rcdb.com/584.htm?p=738

 

[nealbie]

Wooden coasters do have a sort of nostalgic element to them, but times have changed and the face of wooden coasters is not set in stone with classic out-and-back coasters with large amounts of airtime...just saying...

We are aware of the design of one of the main coasters "backing-up" your argument right?.......

Just checking.

 

[reddude333]

We are aware of the design of one of the main coasters "backing-up" your argument right?.......

I was simply saying that regarding the discussion of some of the newer twisting coasters.

And in regards to the massive blueprint, yes I realize this is true, but you have to admit it would look kool...

 

[CMonster]

Time for some more pics!!

Twisting woodies aren't exactly new, as evidenced by this ride:

And many others.

 

[Ben]

Time for some more pics!!

Twisting woodies aren't exactly new, as evidenced by this ride:

And many others.

I see your Cyclone, and raise you the mother of all twisted woodies...

 

[reddude333]

I know that there have been twisters in the past, but I was referring specifically to the new twisters that were being discussed and talking about how Intamin coasters are smooth...anyway, that is hardly on-topic.

And sorry if I think having a coaster look kool is important...by no means I said it was the most important aspect. It was not meant as a justification, just a point that I wanted to make.

 

[s15c]

And in regards to the massive blueprint, yes I realize this is true, but you have to admit it would look kool...

Except rides are built for functionality. "Looking cool" is not a way to justify millions of dollars of an investment.

But you have to admit that looking cool can catch your attention. Though not exactly worth building a ride of questionable quality.

That's my big thought. I mean, if you did a pre-fab, it wouldn't be wooden (in my mind, anyway). If you did a regular woodie, you'd probably need to see a chiropractor after getting off.


EDIT: Having two people talking on the same thread with the same icon is probably a bad idea. Just making sure someone with ADD doesn't think we're the same person or something.

 

[reddude333]

But you have to admit that looking cool can catch your attention. Though not exactly worth building a ride of questionable quality.

Form follows function.

You aren't going to build a 200 ft. coaster for the sake of it "looking cool."

This is real life, with real money - not RCT.

I think it's funny that you keep making the same point over and over regardless of the fact that both of us have stated that we agree and were simply making an observation. Not only is it obvious that building something "for the sake of it 'looking cool'" is not reasonable, but we have agreed and you just think it's somehow worth stating it over and over...

 

[reddude333]

Okay, well, for the third time I will say that I agree with your point in every way and the only reason I mentioned it is because there is an importance to looking impressive...I would never even suggest that this has any precedence over safety, but as evident in the realm of business, something that is more aesthetically pleasing is more likely to make a bigger impression on consumers and is a major selling point to the public...

 

[reddude333]

Regardless of the "look" of the ride, I still think that building a wood hypercoaster is not only feasible, but also could be beneficial financially to whichever park decides to take on the challenge. I doubt the cost would be an issue these days with other extreme steel coasters that no doubt would cost millions more (although maintenance would be an issue with a woodie of such proportions, it can hardly be more of an issue than with LIM or LSM launched coasters that have multiple-breakdown days). I think that this milestone could boost a lesser park into the public eye (or at least the coaster community's eye) or take a park competing for a top spot be just that much more potent. In terms of design I can hardly see how it would be difficult for Intamin to add 20-30 feet to one of their already massive coaster layouts (not to say that an old layout should be used, just in terms of the possibilities). But I see why some people see it just isn't worth it...at least not now...

 

[reddude333]

That's true. The market may be not really present and I understand why steel coasters often appeal more nowadays. I just honestly don't think it would be that much harder to make a coaster like El Toro or Colossos (both prefabs) just that much taller...I think just being the tallest of its kinds might draw a few in and would definitely appeal to enthusiasts so in that sense a lesser known park could really benefit. That being said, I do see that the market is just not as there as I would like it to be. It would take a lot of effort and be chancing a lot on a single (pretty costly) attraction, but El Toro and Voyage are somewhat recent examples of wooden coaster that are tall and really paid off for the parks that invested in them. Both are rating among the top 5 wooden coasters every year and I feel that (even though awards don't necessarily mean a lot) this is a pretty good motive to consider building one because the general public just eats up accolades like this.

 

[reddude333]

I didn't mean they should have done it in those parks; they are just proof that it is easily achievable...also, Son of Beast is no longer active so it honestly can't be counted in the hypercoaster realm (sadly...but then again whenever I defend SOB in any way I always just get flamed for it so it's really not worth going through that again). All to say, yes, those coasters don't need anything more added to them but they are great examples of successful coasters that are relatively tall and could have their layouts adjusted for use as a hypercoaster in a different park.

The topic I originally proposed was asking whether it was possible and probable...at least I think we can agree that it is possible...but not necessarily probable...

 

[Snoo]

Just because a coaster isn't active doesn't mean it isn't a hyper coaster.

 

[furie]

Round and round the Mulberry bush
A pocket full of treacle
That's the way the pedants go round.
POP goes the weasel.

Have we moved on?