What's new

Is RMC going downhill?

IntaminFan20

New Member
I believe that RMC are going downhill because of the new successes of Intamin and the ongoing redevelopment of other manufacturers. GCI will go down a new path with the introduction of the Titan Track and Vekoma are really starting to dominate the coaster scene over here in Europe. I think that RMC is a Prototype company and they have not really got into the real side of coaster manufacturing. The Ibox track is still dominant in the companys portfolio, and the Topper track is basically dead. The Raptor was only really meant to be a small experiment for the T-Rex, (which will NEVER be built). I really do believe that RMC are just getting a punch in the stomach from all of the other amazing manufacturers like: B&M, Intamin, GCI, Vekoma, S&S. So I want to here your thoughts on this topic and I would love to hear your hate comments about me..
 

Heth

Member
I'm not sure I'd agree with your assessment with the state of things. RMC are clearly quite popular and receiving orders. The existence of rival designs of a similar kind from GCI and Intamin doesn't sound to me like RMC going downhill.
 

TLARides

Member
Why would RMC be going downhill? Between the T-Rex and Raptor models, and of course their topper and I-Box track, I'd say RMC is far from going downhill.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
 

Eyebrows

New Member
I believe that RMC are going downhill because of the new successes of Intamin and the ongoing redevelopment of other manufacturers. GCI will go down a new path with the introduction of the Titan Track and Vekoma are really starting to dominate the coaster scene over here in Europe.
That’s literally just competition. RMC’s competitors are improving, so RMC now has more incentive to improve themselves (Just like RMC forced everyone else to improve and take notes from them in the mid-2010’s) This is literally how every business works.
I think that RMC is a Prototype company and they have not really got into the real side of coaster manufacturing.
Where did you get this idea? Every company makes prototypes, it’s how new designs come about. RMC has made almost two dozen roller coasters since 2011, at a rate of two per year! The only reason their count is so low compared to companies like B&M with 180-something coasters is because they’re the newest coaster manufacturer, and they don’t have their roots as far deep in the industry yet. Just give it more time. Don’t forget they also supply track for other companies like S&S.
The Ibox track is still dominant in the companys portfolio, and the Topper track is basically dead. The Raptor was only really meant to be a small experiment for the T-Rex, (which will NEVER be built).
I do agree that the topper track is dead. However, there is a reason that the I-Box track is their dominant model. No other company (except GCI in the last two years) offers a way to convert wooden coasters into steel. It’s true that the raptor track was originally a smaller version of the T-Rex, but it’s become much more than that. So much so that regardless of the T-Rex’s future (I personally believe there is still hope for the model, but that’s not relevant) the Raptor will be here to stay in RMC’s portfolio.

in conclusion, the only sense in which rmc is going downhill is literally, after any of their trains clears the lift 😉

I would love to hear your hate comments about me..
Nobody’s gonna send you hate comments because you put your opinion on a ****ing coaster forum. Grow up.
 
Last edited:

Hyde

I Lied About My Age!
Staff member
Moderator
Social Media Team
I mean if RMC is to be dubbed a "prototype" company; they have built more I-Boxes than B&M has built Floorless or Flying coasters. ;) And no, the Raptor coaster was not to be a "small experiment" - we've covered this extensively through coverage as they've opened. RMC is excited to get more Raptors into the world, and further iteration on the coaster type with Jersey Stunt Pilot.


To also assume coaster companies live and die by the European market is pretty exaggerated - the biggest x-factor market is still China, which has served a boom for a number of companies to develop.

A quick proxy I like to do is looking at # of roller coasters opened each year by manufacturers, as it serves indication for how coaster sales/development are going respective to each company. As the global pandemic has served up a weird curveball that greatly impacts year-to-year development plans for manufacturers, let's take a look at 2020-2021 coasters for each company (I added in a few more for comparison):

Vekoma
31​
Intamin
15​
Mack
12​
Gerstlauer
8​
B&M
7​
S&S
5​
RMC
3​
GCI
2​
GG
2​

Bearing in mind this doesn't consider kiddie coasters, markets, or other variables (which, if you try to use this table to prove the utter defeat of RMC, I will gladly go into the weeds on detail for); I offer this up as no - RMC is not a dynamo producer of Vekoma and Intamin, each of which have 10+ coaster types to their brand; but rather hangs in the similar league of manufacturers with a handful of coaster options.
 

Howie

Active Member
On the other hand, Steel Vengeance has yet to be beaten (IMO) and that was almost 3 years ago now, so in a way he's right.
5 years ago RMC's were new and exciting, bold and brave, unique and excluse. I hadn't ridden one at the time, but I was mad for it. Getting on an RMC was my number 1 must-do thing.
I've been on 9 of 'em now, and I must say that getting new ones is much less of a priority now. This year for example it's the new Intamins that are stirring my loins, not Iron Gwazi or Jersey Devil.
I mean yeah, that's a very personal perspective, and it might not necessarily mean that RMC are "going downhill", but it's a simple fact of life that the more of something there is, the less excluse it becomes.
I can't be the only one who's 'over' the initial buzz of riding an RMC?
 
The only reason their count is so low compared to companies like B&M with 180-something coasters is because they’re the newest coaster manufacturer, and they don’t have their roots as far deep in the industry yet. Just give it more time.
One of the reasons their count is so low is that (at the moment at least) they're not interested in rapid expansion. When I visited the plant in September 2018 I was told that they were in the process of actively reducing their headcount. They don't want the headaches associated with being a much bigger business.
 

Pokemaniac

Mountain monkey
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
On the other hand, Steel Vengeance has yet to be beaten (IMO) and that was almost 3 years ago now, so in a way he's right.
Then again, I'd hardly fault the manufacturer for that. It's not often they get a chance to build a coaster on that scale. How many comparable coasters to Steel Vengeance have been opened since 2018? Only Zadra and Hakugei. Very few parks worldwide have the funds to build coasters of that size, and they don't do so very often. Manufacturers have to bid to win the projects too, so each manufacturer is not building Hypers very often. RMC have only had two tries to beat Steel Vengeance (that we know the result of - Iron Gwazi is built, but not operating). Both those tries have been pretty well-received too. I'd say they've done pretty well with following up Steel Vengeance, given how rarely they've been given the opportunity to do so.
 

Matt N

Well-Known Member
I know this might seem like a strange comparison, but I’d almost liken RMC in the 2010s to what B&M were in the 1990s, in a sense. I know that B&Ms are not very highly received these days on the whole, whereas RMCs still get mostly glowing reception, but if you go back 20-25 years, B&Ms were the hot thing to buy. The Inverted Coaster (the thing that really got B&M going places) was a similarly revolutionary new product to the IBox Track when it was first invented, if not more so, and the level of precision, quality and just the general type of ride experience that B&Ms provided were something that the industry had never seen before at that point in time, in a similar sense to what RMCs were in the early to mid 2010s.

However, the industry became more saturated with B&Ms over time; towards the end of the 1990s to the start of the 2000s, they kind of stopped being the “new and exciting thing” in the industry. I’d also say that this was the sort of time where other manufacturers were devising new and exciting things, and almost trying to beat B&M at their own game to a degree; this is the sort of period where Intamin really started to flourish, for example, with huge new installations like Superman Ride of Steel, Millennium Force, Expedition GeForce and Top Thrill Dragster wowing enthusiasts across the world in the late 90s to early 2000s, as well as new innovations like the Accelerator Coaster proving very popular. This is kind of starting to happen now to RMC, I’d say; loads of companies are starting to build very “RMC-style” attractions now, and possibly with greater overall success in some cases (time will tell on that one).

The other thing that I’d say happened with B&M as their coasters grew more prevalent that I could possibly see happening with RMC over time is that the style of coaster they pioneered and the type of elements used on their rides almost became a little old hat, a little samey. Now I personally think that B&Ms are terrific rides, and I firmly believe in their mantra of quality over fast innovation and “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, but they definitely developed a formula with which they liked to design rides and stuck with it to the letter. For example, many of the multi-looping and inverted coasters they built in the 1990s and 2000s followed a very pre-set sequence of elements that was rejigged slightly for each different ride; the first coaster to use this “formula” so to speak was Kumba in 1993. Over time, the company built more rides with this style of layout and this style of elements, and while none of them were direct Kumba clones, the result was many, many rides which arguably feel pretty similar to one another on the whole, almost interchangeable in some cases. Many of the company’s coasters and elements began to feel very vanilla as B&Ms became more prevalent, and while they’re still very highly received on the whole, a common criticism of B&Ms these days is that they feel too similar to one another, and don’t really push the boat out or do anything too unique.

While I don’t think RMC layouts are built to quite such a rigid “formula” as B&Ms arguably were in the 1990s and 2000s, I’d argue that many of the elements used are very, very similar between the company’s coasters, and they have developed a very set style of ride that they build and stick to building in the same way that B&M did in the 1990s, and I’d argue that this is beginning to result in some of their coasters feeling pretty similar to one another in terms of elements and sensations in a similar manner to what B&Ms started to after time. Of course, there’s nothing necessarily wrong with this if the coasters being built are highly received, in my view, and there’s of course the very likely potential that RMC will pull off more absolute blinders like Steel Vengeance that just wow everybody, in the same way that B&M still pulls off rides like Shambhala and Fury (amongst others) that take the industry by storm, but I think that if RMC were to build a more mid-size coaster of a less impressive scale, of the type people were raving about in the early to mid 2010s when the company’s coasters and elements were far less common, I almost think it would be met with somewhat muted reception, with enthusiasts almost adopting a kind of “been there, done that” kind of mentality towards it in a similar way to the reception that many of B&M’s later coasters have been met with.

So before I ramble on for too long, what I’m basically trying to say is; I don’t think RMC have gone downhill at all, personally, in the exact same way that I don’t think B&M went downhill after the turn of the new millennium. I think the problem is that the products they offer are not necessarily the big, exciting new thing in the industry anymore, and other companies have begun to catch up to them. I know that the comparison of B&M may seem odd given that the two companies build very different coasters, but I think the two companies are possibly more similar to one another than you’d expect.
P.S. I should preface this by saying that I’ve never ridden an RMC, so feel free to correct me if everything I’ve said about their coasters is wrong!
 
Last edited:

JoshC.

Active Member
I believe that RMC are going downhill because of the new successes of Intamin and the ongoing redevelopment of other manufacturers.
This is interesting - your whole point is basically that RMC are going downhill because other manufacturers are improving. So you're not saying that RMC have gotten worse (and, judging by your stance, you in some way used to think they were good)? You're simply saying that other manufacturers are getting better.

Now that's a judgement I can get behind. Intamin and Vekoma in particular are doing great things imo recently, and you can see the obvious inspirations (/ imitations) those companies have gained from RMC. And obviously other manufacturers continue to innovate and develop as appropriate. We're seeing awesome developments and that's a great thing.

But that doesn't mean they're going downhill. Maybe there's less of a wow factor for us enthusiasts, as Howie says, but that's about it.
and Vekoma are really starting to dominate the coaster scene over here in Europe.
Really?

Outside of Energylandia (since they may as well be buying the whole Vekoma catalogue at this point), they have built 11 (ish, might have missed a couple) roller coasters in Europe since 2014. Ignoring Boomerangs and SFCs, the only notable ones are FLY, Lech and Hals Uber Kopf. Even including Energylandia for major rides, that list bumps on Formula, Mayan, Abyssus and the Mine Train. 7 big 'thrill' rides across 4 parks in 7 years is nowhere near dominating. In that same time, RMC have built 3 across 3 parks. Hardly a massive difference.

I can't be the only one who's 'over' the initial buzz of riding an RMC?
As someone who's only done one RMC, but was never fully onboard the RMC hype train, I've definitely felt like the initial RMC buzz has faded. At the very least, the 'everything RMC touch is golden and RMC should do all the things' comments has died down.

I think these things come in waves though, quite naturally. Go back to 2012-15, there was a Mack buzz everywhere due to Helix Hype, as well as their Megas. Then there was a mini Vekoma surge when Formula and Lech hit Poland, before everyone really got on board the RMC hype train (which was always chugging along anyways). That's died away now for the new Intamin madness. Give it a few years and the next buzzing craze will be here, whatever that will be (maybe the RMC T-Rex..).
 

Nicky Borrill

Active Member
Then again, I'd hardly fault the manufacturer for that. It's not often they get a chance to build a coaster on that scale. How many comparable coasters to Steel Vengeance have been opened since 2018? Only Zadra and Hakugei. Very few parks worldwide have the funds to build coasters of that size, and they don't do so very often. Manufacturers have to bid to win the projects too, so each manufacturer is not building Hypers very often. RMC have only had two tries to beat Steel Vengeance (that we know the result of - Iron Gwazi is built, but not operating). Both those tries have been pretty well-received too. I'd say they've done pretty well with following up Steel Vengeance, given how rarely they've been given the opportunity to do so.

That's a very good point. And in addition to that, there are a few people who've ridden the 2 'contenders' as well as SteVe, and rank either one of the others above it...

Example...


And he's not alone... Hope David doesn't mind me posting this...


I think there's a clue in the OP's username ;)
 

Luca B

Member
I know this might seem like a strange comparison, but I’d almost liken RMC in the 2010s to what B&M were in the 1990s, in a sense. I know that B&Ms

very highly received these days on the whole, whereas RMCs still get mostly glowing reception, but if you go back 20-25 years, B&Ms were the hot thing to buy. The Inverted Coaster (the thing that really got B&M going places) was a similarly revolutionary new product to the IBox Track when it was first invented, if not more so, and the level of precision, quality and just the general type of ride experience that B&Ms provided were something that the industry had never seen before at that point in time, in a similar sense to what RMCs were in the early to mid 2010s.

However, the industry became more saturated with B&Ms over time; towards the end of the 1990s to the start of the 2000s, they kind of stopped being the “new and exciting thing” in the industry. I’d also say that this was the sort of time where other manufacturers were devising new and exciting things, and almost trying to beat B&M at their own game to a degree; this is the sort of period where Intamin really started to flourish, for example, with huge new installations like Superman Ride of Steel, Millennium Force, Expedition GeForce and Top Thrill Dragster wowing enthusiasts across the world in the late 90s to early 2000s, as well as new innovations like the Accelerator Coaster proving very popular. This is kind of starting to happen now to RMC, I’d say; loads of companies are starting to build very “RMC-style” attractions now, and possibly with greater overall success in some cases (time will tell on that one).

The other thing that I’d say happened with B&M as their coasters grew more prevalent that I could possibly see happening with RMC over time is that the style of coaster they pioneered and the type of elements used on their rides almost became a little old hat, a little samey. Now I personally think that B&Ms are terrific rides, and I firmly believe in their mantra of quality over fast innovation and “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, but they definitely developed a formula with which they liked to design rides and stuck with it to the letter. For example, many of the multi-looping and inverted coasters they built in the 1990s and 2000s followed a very pre-set sequence of elements that was rejigged slightly for each different ride; the first coaster to use this “formula” so to speak was Kumba in 1993. Over time, the company built more rides with this style of layout and this style of elements, and while none of them were direct Kumba clones, the result was many, many rides which arguably feel pretty similar to one another on the whole, almost interchangeable in some cases. Many of the company’s coasters and elements began to feel very vanilla as B&Ms became more prevalent, and while they’re still very highly received on the whole, a common criticism of B&Ms these days is that they feel too similar to one another, and don’t really push the boat out or do anything too unique.

While I don’t think RMC layouts are built to quite such a rigid “formula” as B&Ms arguably were in the 1990s and 2000s, I’d argue that many of the elements used are very, very similar between the company’s coasters, and they have developed a very set style of ride that they build and stick to building in the same way that B&M did in the 1990s, and I’d argue that this is beginning to result in some of their coasters feeling pretty similar to one another in terms of elements and sensations in a similar manner to what B&Ms started to after time. Of course, there’s nothing necessarily wrong with this if the coasters being built are highly received, in my view, and there’s of course the very likely potential that RMC will pull off more absolute blinders like Steel Vengeance that just wow everybody, in the same way that B&M still pulls off rides like Shambhala and Fury (amongst others) that take the industry by storm, but I think that if RMC were to build a more mid-size coaster of a less impressive scale, of the type people were raving about in the early to mid 2010s when the company’s coasters and elements were far less common, I almost think it would be met with somewhat muted reception, with enthusiasts almost adopting a kind of “been there, done that” kind of mentality towards it in a similar way to the reception that many of B&M’s later coasters have been met with.

So before I ramble on for too long, what I’m basically trying to say is; I don’t think RMC have gone downhill at all, personally, in the exact same way that I don’t think B&M went downhill after the turn of the new millennium. I think the problem is that the products they offer are not necessarily the big, exciting new thing in the industry anymore, and other companies have begun to catch up to them. I know that the comparison of B&M may seem odd given that the two companies build very different coasters, but I think the two companies are possibly more similar to one another than you’d expect.
P.S. I should preface this by saying that I’ve never ridden an RMC, so feel free to correct me if everything I’ve said about their coasters is wrong!
I’d say that the B&M comparison isn’t really the best. Most of the 1990s B&M inverts are still really well regarded, it’s just the newer ones with the seemingly less intense designs such as Silver Bullet and Patriot are less liked by enthusiasts.

I do agree among quite a few enthusiasts there is a “been there, done that” attitude, but pretty much all new RMCs are regarded as world class coasters, unlike B&M who have arguably only really made a couple of world class coasters in the last decade. Also RMC seems to be changing up their designs a lot with the Raptors and the ground up Hyper Hybrids, as they seem to focus less on just constant airtime hills, but instead have more variation with more sustained moments, whippy elements, positives and aggressive inversions. This is really evident in Iron Gwazi which focuses much more on larger elements and fast, intense turns which most traditional RMCs don’t have whilst still keeping the signature RMC aggressiveness. With this RMC is really fixing most of the complaints people have about the repetitiveness of the layouts.

I get that there could be more variation with RMC since they are only really building 2 models, but right now they are pretty much building rides which are pretty much everything enthusiasts ask for, so even if most RMCs are really similar I don’t really mind as they are all still world class and most have what I look for in a coaster.

I believe that RMC are going downhill because of the new successes of Intamin and the ongoing redevelopment of other manufacturers. GCI will go down a new path with the introduction of the Titan Track and Vekoma are really starting to dominate the coaster scene over here in Europe. I think that RMC is a Prototype company and they have not really got into the real side of coaster manufacturing. The Ibox track is still dominant in the companys portfolio, and the Topper track is basically dead. The Raptor was only really meant to be a small experiment for the T-Rex, (which will NEVER be built). I really do believe that RMC are just getting a punch in the stomach from all of the other amazing manufacturers like: B&M, Intamin, GCI, Vekoma, S&S. So I want to here your thoughts on this topic and I would love to hear your hate comments about me..

Now onto the actual question, the fact that all of RMC’s coasters since Steel Vengeance and probably even before then are contenders for best in the world combined with the fact that Raptors are selling like crazy, it is clear to see that no matter what way you look at it, RMC is not going downhill.
 
Last edited:

Serena

Miss CoasterForce 2016
Staff member
Social Media Team
To me, "going downhill" means manufacturing disapointing rides. I don't know about you but I've yet to be disappointed by an RMC. Plus, the new coasters they are opening this year are exciting and innovative - so they're still easily meeting those high RMC expectations!

The success of other manufacturers does not seem relevant to me. It doesn't signify that RMC are going downhill. If anything, these other manufacturers adding Zero G stalls and stuff shows that RMC have inspired other manufacturers to evolve.
 
Top