Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

The Next Tallest, Fastest Rollercoaster

I actually suspect that the next tallest and fastest "traditional" coaster we'll see will be like Rossa. Huge, effin' lift hill, colossal drop that nags the height and speed records, then a Ka-like trim hill. Proceed to swish around the layout at ~100 km/h. Huge effin' hills, lifts or not, are extremely expensive, so you'll want to build as few of them as possible. Huge effin' turns and overbanks also cost money, so the cheapest thing to do would be cutting speed before continuing with the layout.

Also, as stated earlier in this topic, I somehow suspect that the next tallest coaster in the world is already built.
 
Money and space are the huge issues with nabbing these two records. Millennium Force cost $25 million in 2000. Top Thrill Dragster cost the same amount three years later. Steel Dragon 2000 cost...what, $50 million? I can't find a cost for Formula Rossa, but I'm positive it's way up there. Even Leviathan cost $28 million.

Millennium Force and Leviathan, although they made both rides work out nicely, require a large amount of space. Steel Dragon 2000 also sits on a huge plot of land. Rossa was build in a desert, so it doesn't matter, but it still sits on an insane amount of land.

If these records were to be broken, engineers and parks are going to have to get very creative to do so. I can picture something like Hypersonic XLC (minus the suck) working, but that's about it. The ride would have to travel over other rides and buildings, cross most or the entire park, and probably wouldn't be very long with regard to time. I guess we will see what happens though.
 
Antinos said:
Money and space are the huge issues with nabbing these two records. Millennium Force cost $25 million in 2000. Top Thrill Dragster cost the same amount three years later. Steel Dragon 2000 cost...what, $50 million? I can't find a cost for Formula Rossa, but I'm positive it's way up there. Even Leviathan cost $28 million.
Click to expand...
And I305 cost $25 million in 2010. Intamin are trying their best to keep the costs low. Their new lift system, the double spine that requires less supports and the ground hugging layout show this. 10 years later and they still managed to keep the price tag the same as MF :) I guess I305 take up quite a bit of land though and it would probably be a lot easier to squeeze in an out and back layout à la Leviathan.

Leviathan gotta coast more since it's a beemer of course, but also because it utilizes heavier 4 across trains and therefore needs more supporting. And if I remember correct the hefty price tag for SD2K was due to oversupporting because of the ever present risk of earthquakes in Japan.

Antinos said:
If these records were to be broken, engineers and parks are going to have to get very creative to do so. I can picture something like Hypersonic XLC (minus the suck) working, but that's about it. The ride would have to travel over other rides and buildings, cross most or the entire park, and probably wouldn't be very long with regard to time. I guess we will see what happens though.
Click to expand...
I agree. But as I wrote above I think Intamin is already trying their best! I'm sure they can make a new version of Ka, maybe a few feet higher to break the record, but keep the cost the same as before. I'm sure they can break SD2K's lift hill record as well to a reasonable price. It'll still be expensive, and it'll require a lot of land. But I've no doubt it could be done with modern technology!
 
This isn't only about engineering, or for that matter money. I bet there are park chains out there who, if they really, really wanted could ordered built a 200 m lift coaster without getting huge financial problems.

It's more a question of justifying the expense. Why spend $100 million on a ride when a $30 million one would give you just as much PR and customer draw? If you already rake in on the visitors, why spend 50 millions on keeping them coming, when a ride for $15 million will do just as well?

At the moment, breaking a record is so expensive that it isn't really worth it for most parks. The money can be better spent elsewhere. Without breaking records, we're still getting great rides for those sums.
 
It's more a question of justifying the expense. Why spend $100 million on a ride when a $30 million one would give you just as much PR and customer draw?
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, but you could say that about most coaster additions. For example, Parc Asterix spending XXX on a B&M Invert, when they could have just gone for the much cheaper SLC.
 
I thought part of Steel Dragon's epic cost was earthquake proofing.
So the next big on probably wouldn't be $50 mill.

And yeah Intamin does a great job keeping costs lower.
Another reason they will keep owning any records, a massive B&Mer maybe could actually hit $50 mill!
 
^Steel Dragon was built 12 years ago though. $50 million in 2000 would be more like $68 million today, assuming the same technology and materials were used of course. But yeah, as has been said, it's not really the best coaster to use for a price comparison, simply due to the fact that the excessive support structure is not something that most parks would need to go for.

With regards to I305, the only reason it was so "cheap" at $25 million is because after the first drop, the whole thing is very close to the ground. It's not accurate to compare it to the cost of Millennium Force. I don't want to keep going on about it since I've already said what I think in the MF vs I305 topic, but it's less a case of Intamin keeping costs lower, and more a case of the park wanting a massive coaster for as little as possible. It's not quite the same thing. They wouldn't have been able to build another Millennium Force for $25 million; the lift hill and drop may be more "affordable", but the layout after the initial drop has had to be somewhat sacrificed, at least size-wise, to bring it in on budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top