The regressions will continue as follows:
-Zierer ESC
-zamperla family coaster
-Vekoma Junior Coaster
-wisdom Rides Dragon Wagon
Last edited:
Project 2025/Holzfäller: Big Bad Wolf 2 (B&M Family Invert)
- Thread starter Zachary
- Start date
- Status
-Zierer ESC
-zamperla family coaster
-Vekoma Junior Coaster
-wisdom Rides Dragon Wagon
One other thing I thought of—a vertical lift is one of gerstlauer’s specialties. Could we see an infinity coaster closer to the scale of Karnan back there? The infinity coaster model is also one of the most flexible as well. Also just throwing this out there as a wild card, a Maurer X Car is an option, given the extreme flexibility of those rides as well.
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
Is there any merit to this assessment?
I just responded over on Reddit, but no. The plan gives us the areas in which new impervious surfaces will be installed. Estimating footer locations off of that information is trivial and then we're off to the races. Thanks to @CoasterMac, @intim305, and Jake, we're getting VERY close to having it solved.
My only response to this: it’s the 42” height requirement. That’s a big fucking deal. Especially at BGW. I know, my niece cried at Tradewind over that rides 48” height requirement over frustration with the park in general for this reason.
That really seems more like the other problem of BGW removing family Flat rides and not replacing them. Not saying a family invert wouldn’t help that, but more flats would probably help more while still having something big in the back to attract people to that back corner of the park
This is a more high level overall parkwide issue than a detailed specific type of ride issue and a common complaint of families who BGW wants as much of as possible inside their money extraction zone.
I really agree that height requirement is super important and should be met with a fun family coaster. BUT I don't think that coaster should waste the former Drachen Fire field AND the Boneyard. To me that is incredibly short sighted. One or the other would be fine, but both? Where is the future?
I do not disagree. This sudden pivot in direction is somewhat alarming to suggest a complete lack of vision or plan as @Zachary has pointed out before. It seems to really illustrate it's basically a bunch of PE bros running a theme park company just throwing darts at a "how to make as much profit as humanly possible" dart board.
I still feel like flats add just as much value to the experience. Rides like DaVinci’s Cradle, Lemans, Battle for Eire, Wirbelwinchen, Curse of DarKastle all are great options for families with smaller kids that may not be ready for bigger coasters, but can still have great days at the park. The park has either just removed these rides without a replacement or replaced them with something very different. There are just so many unique flats out there that that can fill that family gap and give kids something to do and inherently add value to the day.
??? this type of situation likely arose from B&M offering SEAS a package deal of their coasters and SEAS took it because "cheap" and "solves height requirement issue" for them. I'm not sure what other ride manufacturers offered bids for that project other than potentially RMC and Intamin.
I agree with you on the intangible value of flat rides to park goers. We're not making the capex decisions though and Scott Ross isn't sending me a calendar invite on those meetings anytime soon/ever.
I mean cheap, yes but if they were just going for cheap, low height requirement rides, B&M isn’t typically your source. There are so many cheaper models out there that other manufacturers feasibly could have built. The Tampa invert makes sense because they just removed a family coaster and need a replacement. Orlando makes sense because it’s the world’s largest family destination and needs as many family attractions as possible. A family Invert just doesn’t make sense from a needs standpoint other than the 42 inch height. I understand that the brass at the top absolutely do not know their audience, but it feels like this would just be an egregiously wrong move for the BGW crowd.
i know that everyone wanted an rmc (well enough people for me to comfortably say everyone) but I just want to make a point so everyone will take a breath for a moment. Normally I would be more vocal during this time but I’m currently in Tennessee visiting Dollywood(write up comparison thread to come) and I just want to say IMO the single best coaster in this park is big bear, (I know lighting rod is down so it’s not totally fair, buts it’s also a brand new coaster undergoing a rebuild) it’s a well Theme, smooth as butter amazingly paced, well done total package, “family coaster with a height limit of 39” “ but my point is just because it’s a family coaster with a low height requirement doesn’t mean it can’t be an amazing coaster, granted I know that the bar will be incredibly high, but if things trend the way that are, it will be a B&M that basically means we know we’re getting a good smooth coaster no matter what. Loch Ness seems to show all signs point to the park understanding the importance of theming is still there. We all know if they pay homage to the big bad wolf and do so respectfully we all going to love it even if we don’t want to admit it. don’t get me wrong I wanted a world class coaster but after this week in Tennessee I have to admit that BGW already has a pretty stacked coaster collection this may just add to it.
The "family" coasters at Dollywood are phenomenal and made me re-think what a family coaster could do.
Big Bear is a prime example of what can be accomplished with them
If there’s going to be a world class family coaster I’d just assume let b&m take a crack at it and hope for the best.
I would love to see what the next step up from Penguin Trek/Pipeline would be.
I feel the newly designed B&M trains could rival the blitz if the they let B&M go off
Regardless of whether it is a great family coaster with immersive theming that fills a height niche, the location is a complete mystery. It can be a great project and still be terribly located within the park.
If theories are correct and this is a fun little family coaster, then BGW has used a huge plot of land, which could have been saved for something enormous that would pull people in and drive attendance, on an attraction that won’t even be visible from most of the park.
I, personally, find incomprehensible decisions like this frustrating to watch unfold. It isn’t about what I want to ride, it is about the park undermining itself and throwing away huge opportunities.
If theories are correct and this is a fun little family coaster, then BGW has used a huge plot of land, which could have been saved for something enormous that would pull people in and drive attendance, on an attraction that won’t even be visible from most of the park.
I, personally, find incomprehensible decisions like this frustrating to watch unfold. It isn’t about what I want to ride, it is about the park undermining itself and throwing away huge opportunities.
I just want a lift hill you can see from I-64, is that too much to ask?
- Status