New Credit or Modification?

[CarolinaRider]

Say someone called up RMC to convert their wooden coaster, but instead of using IBox track, they used topper track. Would it qualify as a new coaster or would it be the same as a reprofiling/new trains? It is a change in technology, and technically, topper track isn't even wooden. But how do you think the park and general public would see it?

 

[Jarrett]

My rule is simple: additive work is a new cred, subtractive isn't. Hades 360 was a new one, Son of Beast when they removed the loop wasn't. So because it would technically be a retracking, assuming RMC was making the layout more complex, it's a new cred.

 

[Ben]

^Hades 360 was not a new cred... Like at all.

Is Topper Track what Outlaw Run has? Because that is wooden? And so if it was just a retracking without a complete layout change, not a new cred.

 

[Hyde]

I take Jarrett's rule to a specific metric - if over half of the original track is modified, then it counts as a new credit.

Reprofiling of one element or a few turns hardly carries merit for a new credit - there needs to be a fundamental difference in the ride experience in order for it to count as a new one.

For instance, Phantom's Revenge original conversion from Steel Phantom still carried the original first two drops and lift hill. While original track remained, majority of the original layout had been altered.

In terms of RMC retrack work - new track would most imaginatively carry new element addition, turn reprofile, etc. The sheer cost of simple track replacement would be majority of the project cost - so it would make sense to throw in changes to the layout as well, which would be a minimal expense. New track lay and new layout profiles would merit a new credit. Just new track lay would push the bounds, but I do not think any amusement park would plan to take this route, based on the simple costs of the project.

 

[Tomatron]

Reprofiling - as what happened with the old Rattler at Fiesta Texas is not a new cred.

Complete retracking with a different material/massive layout change, when the ride went to Iron Rattler is a new cred.

Removing a loop/adding a loop, as on Son on Beast, Drachen Fire, Hades 360 and the Demon coasters at the Six Flags/California's America parks does not constitute a new cred.

 

[ECG]

SFNE had RMC do a topper track treatment of Cyclone for 2011, replacing much of the original track with topper just a a few years before the Iron Horse conversion. They also did it on Georgia Cyclone and Tremors, so I believe there will be other parks that will use RMC's topper track without a change to the layout and I definitely didn't count any of them as new credz when I rode them after the treatments.

 

[Pokemaniac]

I keep a quite simple system for such cases: If I'm in doubt whether or not a coaster is a "cred" it goes on a separate list for doubtful cases. My coaster count would then look something like 36+3, meaning there are 36 coasters on there that everybody agrees are separate creds, and three coasters where this is disputable. Such an RMC revamp would go straight to the "maybe" list, but it wouldn't inflate my coaster count unless definitions are very loose.

 

[GuyWithAStick]

A little reprofiling is not a cred. RMCs are new creds.

Sent from my VS840 4G using Tapatalk

 

[CarolinaRider]

A little reprofiling is not a cred. RMCs are new creds.

Sent from my VS840 4G using Tapatalk

I know that that but the scenario I'm suggesting is similar to the proposed "Lake Monster" at Darien Lake. Would that have counted since they were planning on keeping part of the original layout?

 

[GuyWithAStick]

^I'd consider Lake Monster a new cred. If it's a simple reprofiled turn or 2-ish changed elements(i.e Stampida, Demon, Hades 360, etc). If it's a completely new layout, which is what looks like what Lake Monster was supposed to be, I'd say new cred.

Sent from my VS840 4G using Tapatalk