Millennium Force review
Jeremy
figured this would be an appropriate time to post a Millennium Force
write up seeing how well it has retained relevancy a full decade
later.
http://www.rollercoasterphilosophy.com/2010/millennium-force-analysis/
I know that there are two different schools of thought on Millennium
Force, one that says it's forceless with overly-long transitions, the
other that says it's awesome anyway. Just curious what people think
about the ride or if their opinion has changed at all the more they've
gotten to ride it. I wrote in my article that I've noticed a bit of a
self-fulfilling prophecy regarding people's reactions to the ride;
those that are hyped up for their ride come back loving it, while
those that are hard to impress come back not very impressed. Did
anyone have an experience where the ride performed contrary to their
expectations (either good or bad)?
Dana Schwartz
<jkthom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Seeing as it is now a full decade after the turn of the millennium,
Oh, dear. (-;
Dana Schwartz, waiting for the other shoe to drop...
David Sandborg
<0e628d1d-ca57-4656...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
Jeremy <jkthom...@gmail.com> wrote:
I have to admit I wasn't expecting to really like Millennium Force a
whole lot, since I knew I didn't find overbanked turns to be all that
inspiring. On my first ride I found the first drop mind-blowing but
indeed found the rest of the ride somewhat meandering though blazing
fast. In later years I've come to like it better, but oddly enough just
because I find it a "fun" ride than that I think it's all that
thrilling. I remain a Magnum fan but am pretty sure I'm in the minority
among coaster enthusiasts or GP alike.
--
Dave Sandborg
Remove Spam-away to respond via e-mail.
BaSSiStiSt
wrote:
> I have to admit I wasn't expecting to really like Millennium Force a
> whole lot, since I knew I didn't find overbanked turns to be all that
> inspiring. On my first ride I found the first drop mind-blowing but
> indeed found the rest of the ride somewhat meandering though blazing
> fast. In later years I've come to like it better, but oddly enough just
> because I find it a "fun" ride than that I think it's all that
> thrilling. I remain a Magnum fan but am pretty sure I'm in the minority
> among coaster enthusiasts or GP alike.
Girlfriend calls it the "World's Biggest Kiddie Coaster", which I
think is particularly apt.
<--- rode the "World's Greatest Launched Kiddie Coaster" today at
Knotts and LOVED it...for what it was.
Sam Woodson
> Seeing as it is now a full decade after the turn of the millennium, I
> figured this would be an appropriate time to post a Millennium Force
> write up seeing how well it has retained relevancy a full decade
> later.
>
> http://www.rollercoasterphilosophy.com/2010/millennium-force-analysis/
>
I think's it's a great ride, still enjoy it very much every time I go
to the point.
J McDonnell
wrote:
> In article
> <0e628d1d-ca57-4656-ae77-98b89f62d...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
I'm in Dave's camp. I'd rather be riding Magnum (or Gemini or Blue
Streak) than MF. It simply does nothing for me.
Nashville Mike
got past the height and the first drop, it did nothing. The worlds
tallest scenic railway is how I used to describe it.
However, thinking how the GP would think about it, it's different.
It's interesting to talk to the GP, particularly those I happen to
know - living in Nashville and working at a company there are quite a
few people who have made the trek up to Cedar Point and are familiar
with the rides. Some of them go every year, for example. What I've
seen, with some of my coworkers actually makes sense - upon their
first ride of whatever big/new/tall ride, they are impressed - the GP
don't ride as much as we (the enthusiasts) do, and their bodies aren't
attuned or accustomed to the variety of forces. Just getting on
something that large and fast impresses them. But a conversation I had
a couple of years ago when TTD was still somewhat new comes to mind -
the guy I was talking to said that while he really liked the ride, he
could absolutely see that in a year or two it would no longer thrill
him since by that time the newness factor of the ride would have worn
off, and that once you get past it, a launch ride like that is the
very definition of a one-trick-pony ride, and once you're used to that
trick, it's no longer exciting. So while these rides have a lot of
immediate thrill, to someone who either rides a lot (us) or returns
yearly (some of the GP), at time they lose their luster while a really
good ride with a better design that incorporates more than one type of
force and a bit more creativity will hold up better over time in terms
of excitement. To continue the example from above - the guy I talked
to over time really likes Maverick at CP because while not as high,
fast, or thrillling *initially*, even he said he realizes now that
it's just more *interesting* as a ride and that his desire to ride it
seems to be steady while these days he could care less if he returned
to TTD or MF. Size/Height impresses initially, later on it's the other
aspects of the design that come through, particularly with the GP:
I've heard this with folks who go up to HW each year to ride the
Voyage - upon their initial ride, they come back only remembering the
height and speed of the first drop and little else. Now that it's been
open a few years, when they come back now, suddenly they are talking
about the return run or the tunnels or the turnaround or something
else not related to it's immediate appeal.
-m
mikepin
270 lbs size 40 but since they changed belts too big now.
bummer. Wish they would fix that issue
nogodforme
MF still draws huge crowds. The early morning thrill ride tour is
Maverick, MF, Raptor (before GP crowd is released), TTD. MF still
gives huge air on the first drop if you're near the back. And the
over all speed makes it fun. I wouldn't call it a kiddie ride. If
forces and getting thrown around are your thing, then go on a woodie
or Magnum. I'm 5'9, 200lbs and get thrown around on Magnum at the
end. No, I'm not fat because I can still ride MF and TTD and like
them better. In fact, on my trip to CP last year, I didn't ride
Magnum, or any woodies. I did the thrill ride tour each morning and
was happy. So the size of the person could have a lot to do with
it. A GF who only weighs 120lbs can go on anything and it's no big
deal. Whereas a guy who weighs 200, and is 5'9, can be cramped on a
woodie, and that's exactly what happened on SOB, which is why I quit
riding that thing years ago. Woodies are not my thing these days,
and that's also why you see HW putting new trains on The
Voyage.
BaSSiStiSt
> the guy I was talking to said that while he really liked the ride, he
> could absolutely see that in a year or two it would no longer thrill
> him since by that time the newness factor of the ride would have worn
> off, and that once you get past it, a launch ride like that is the
> very definition of a one-trick-pony ride, and once you're used to that
> trick, it's no longer exciting.
Of course, Intamin has figured out some new ways to keep "one-trick
pony" rides fresh for us enthusiass types who know too much about
coasters...cable snaps, metal fatigue, etc. :-)
TTD still scares the hell out of me every ride, but for reasons the
designers probably did not intend.
Steelforce
> Woodies are not my thing these days,
> and that's also why you see HW putting new trains on The
> Voyage.
DAG! I shoulda known that HW was changin their trains just for you!
ri...@aol.com
> very definition of a one-trick-pony ride, and once you're used to that
I've always wondered why they don't add on to these rides. You've got
all that launch velocity burned off on brakes. After a few years they
could add a second half to the ride (remember the fake(?) concept
drawing of TTD with extra track, and Xcelerator's deleted ending
helix?). Sure, it's not "plus one" on their coaster count but if it's
substantial enough it would be "New!" and "Thrilling!" and, hence,
marketable.
Rik
Dave Althoff, Jr.
: On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 16:36:48 -0800 (PST), Jeremy
At least he remembered to spell 'millennium' with two n's :)
(Jeremy, if you are feeling clueless, go to groups.google.com, go to the
advanced search and look up the following message-ID:
19991203005041...@ng-fe1.aol.com
Be sure to look at the whole thread. All of it. You might learn
something. Be sure to grab a sandwich *first*.)
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
/X\ _ *** Respect rides. They do not respect you. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ /XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
NEW! When emailing this account, include the 'canonical magic word' in
the body of your message for a quicker response.
Jeremy
<dalloff.gcfn....@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Dana Schwartz <danaschwa...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> : On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 16:36:48 -0800 (PST), Jeremy: <jkthompso...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> :
> : >Seeing as it is now a full decade after the turn of the millennium,
> :
> : Oh, dear. (-;
> :
> : Dana Schwartz, waiting for the other shoe to drop...
>
> At least he remembered to spell 'millennium' with two n's :)
>
> (Jeremy, if you are feeling clueless, go to groups.google.com, go to the
> advanced search and look up the following message-ID:
>
> Be sure to look at the whole thread. All of it. You might learn
> something. Be sure to grab a sandwich *first*.)
>
> --Dave Althoff, Jr.
> /X\ _ *** Respect rides. They do not respect you. ***
> /XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
> /XXXXX\ /XXX\ /XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
> _/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
> NEW! When emailing this account, include the 'canonical magic word' in
> the body of your message for a quicker response.
Crap, I even remember before I started that I was going to try not to
forget that the actual new millennium began on Jan 1st, 2001. Guess I
forgot pretty quickly. Well, I think most of my usage within the
article can be defended somewhat by noting that I was referring to the
'millennium' within the context of how popular culture viewed the new
year, although my opening statements in this thread cannot be excused.
Wolf
"Dave Althoff, Jr." <dalloff....@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:hi3qvs$c8k$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> Dana Schwartz <danasc...@optonline.net> wrote:
> : On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 16:36:48 -0800 (PST), Jeremy
> : <jkthom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> :
> : >Seeing as it is now a full decade after the turn of the millennium,
> :
> : Oh, dear. (-;
> :
> : Dana Schwartz, waiting for the other shoe to drop...
>
> At least he remembered to spell 'millennium' with two n's :)
>
> (Jeremy, if you are feeling clueless, go to groups.google.com, go to the
> advanced search and look up the following message-ID:
> 19991203005041...@ng-fe1.aol.com
>
> Be sure to look at the whole thread. All of it. You might learn
> something. Be sure to grab a sandwich *first*.)
>
> --Dave Althoff, Jr.
I'm amazed it's only 405 posts.
--
|\-/|
<0 0>
=(o)=
-Wolf
David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
I'd say that the main reason they don't build longer rides is that they'd
be too expensive. They're already $30+ million! What park can even afford
THAT these days, never mind more?
And why bother adding to an existing ride, when for a bit more you can add
a whole new coaster?
Honestly, I don't think that adding to a ride makes it significantly more
marketable. And it would be significantly more expensive.
The only real good example right now is Phantom's Revenge. But they
dramatically changed the ride. And Kennywood is an interesting exception
to a lot of the amusement parks rules anyways.
I don't think that you can really count either of the Bizarros, since they
mainly just added effects. Plus, the one at SFNE is such a top tier ride
that it didn't really need any more marketing to keep people interested.
It's the main (and probably only) reason that people go to the park besides
the water park.
I guess the one at SFGAdv is a somewhat better example, though, since
they've turned a dated ride with little interest from the GP into a
must-ride attraction again. But will that last more than a year? And it
still was MUCH cheaper than adding a whole new section of the ride.
Perhaps the best test of this theory will be the new Texas Giant, since
it's going to be significantly changed?
Will the GP see it as a NEW ride? Will they come out in numbers big enough
to justify the expense? Would they have been better of just demolishing it
and building a new one? (No matter what WE may think.) We'll see.
David H, davi...@STOPSPAMbellatlantic.net, Boston, MA
PLEASE remove "STOPSPAM" from my address when replying via e-mail.
"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by
the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree
in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support
him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not
to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he
fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is
unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or
anyone else."
-- Theodore Roosevelt
nogodforme
> >could add a second half to the ride (remember the fake(?) concept
> >drawing of TTD with extra track, and Xcelerator's deleted ending
> >helix?). Sure, it's not "plus one" on their coaster count but if it's
> >substantial enough it would be "New!" and "Thrilling!" and, hence,
> >marketable.
This.
I remember that drawing and tried to find it many times since, but
it's gone.
It was on a site called www.mp3.com but now that site deals with
music.
If anyone still has that drawing, please post it somewhere. When I
saw that drawing I was like WOW, that's cool.
I agree, CP should take TTD and do the MP3 design where it goes over
to the island and comes back. But I'm sure the cost would be so
much, they figure it's not worth it.
I'd say it's well worth it, kinda like what Kennywood did with PR.
They took an outdated ride and made it new again.
Jeremy
> > >After a few years they
> > >could add a second half to the ride (remember the fake(?) concept
> > >drawing of TTD with extra track, and Xcelerator's deleted ending
> > >helix?). Sure, it's not "plus one" on their coaster count but if it's
> > >substantial enough it would be "New!" and "Thrilling!" and, hence,
> > >marketable.
>
> This.
>
> I remember that drawing and tried to find it many times since, but
> it's gone.
>
> music.
>
> If anyone still has that drawing, please post it somewhere. When I
> saw that drawing I was like WOW, that's cool.
>
> I agree, CP should take TTD and do the MP3 design where it goes over
> to the island and comes back. But I'm sure the cost would be so
> much, they figure it's not worth it.
>
> I'd say it's well worth it, kinda like what Kennywood did with PR.
> They took an outdated ride and made it new again.
Eh, I don't think a design like that would work well on Top Thrill
Dragster anyway. They'd have to slow it down to at least 70 or so
before they could do anything interesting, if it were left at 120mph
it would have incredibly slow timing to get through the elements in
order to keep the forces within tolerable ranges. Besides it would
reduce the capacity, the next train can't launch until the one before
it has completely finished the main deceleration strip and passed the
first block. Maybe if they were to have it loop around the island at
ground level with a few switchbacks similar to Intimidator 305's
middle section, but then they already have Maverick for that.
Funtype
But that's what RCT is for!
--CM
mamoosh
> Did anyone have an experience where the ride performed
> contrary to their expectations (either good or bad)?
I like Millie, although I have not ridden since 2001. My very first
ride in 2000 was very late in the evening, back row, and the bottom
half of the first drop was pitch black. That environment and lack of
sight references gave the wonderful illusion the drop was much steeper
than 80* and much longer than 300-feet. My first front-seat ride was
in 2001. As we crested the lift it started to pour and I spent the
entire ride covering my face from the sting of the raindrops. So much
for any POV, lol.
The ride pretty much met my expectations. I got airtime where I
expected some. It was fast and smooth. Not much to complain about
there. I've ridden well over 400 steel coasters so there's no way I'd
attempt to rank them but I would expect Milie to end up somewhere in
the top 25%.
mOOSH
Dave Althoff, Jr.
:
: "Dave Althoff, Jr." <dalloff....@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
: I'm amazed it's only 405 posts.
I think it is actually longer than that, but Google had a hard time keeping
track of it. It seems that there are some people out there who can't
spell, and a number of newsreaders that don't use the References: header,
so it's divided into multiple threads in the Google database.
nogodforme
> On Jan 2, 4:36 pm, Jeremy <jkthompso...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Did anyone have an experience where the ride performed
> > contrary to their expectations (either good or bad)?
>
> I like Millie, although I have not ridden since 2001. My very first
> ride in 2000 was very late in the evening, back row, and the bottom
> half of the first drop was pitch black. That environment and lack of
> sight references gave the wonderful illusion the drop was much steeper
> than 80* and much longer than 300-feet. My first front-seat ride was
> in 2001. As we crested the lift it started to pour and I spent the
> entire ride covering my face from the sting of the raindrops. So much
> for any POV, lol.
I also got my first ride in the dark after waiting 3 hours. Back
row, couldn't see much, lifted up out of my seat at the crest of the
lift, held my hands up, and floated down the first hill. It was
amazing, especially after that long wait. I guess that once you go a
few times, you get used to it. I've been in the front a few
times.
If it's not raining, the thing you have to look out for is bugs in the
morning. I usually go down the first drop with my hands up, then put
them in front of my face.
TTD isn't much better in the front. The eyes get watery and I'm
worried about my contact lenses getting blasted out. I have to squint
my eyes and put my hands in front of my face. Which is why some
fanatics wear ski goggles on KK.
I went last year and the rides on MF are still the same. I give CP
credit for that, they seem to have heard me complain about rides not
being open early in the morning. They still do the 2 rides for the
passholder / hotel crowd at 9am. And here's another tip, if you
arrive on Memorial Day which is May 31st, Breakers Express is a ghost
town. Last year, I stayed on Memorial day because my flight was the
next morning. I did the thrill ride tour in the morning, went back
to the hotel room, and all the rooms were open because they were being
cleaned. The people had left to go home and get ready for work. I
was walking through the halls of BE and it was like a ghost town.
So if you can take off work that week, do it Tuesday through Friday
after Memorial day. Fly on the holiday to CP, and the place will
have moderate crowds the next day.
Jeremy
Early season weekdays are pretty awesome, but for me not much beats
Friday night Halloweekends. It's actually been a bit more crowded on
the last few times I've gone (like, TTD has a line beginning just
before the station instead of being walk-on... at least before the
last hour or two), but getting the unlimited night rides, especially
with all the fog that drifts into the ride paths from the haunts they
set up (which themselves are nice because they make walking some of
the main pathways between rides more interesting) makes it well worth
it to try to go on a Friday. Haven't been to enough to have a clear
idea of what the crowd patterns are, but I think earlier in the
Halloweekend season has lower crowds. Once I went on their first
Friday and later that night they were letting MF guests get off the
unload platform, cut through to the load platform and get a re-ride on
the train *ahead* of the one we just got off. I'm pretty sure we
somehow warped the space-time continuum with that maneuver...
BaSSiStiSt
> Haven't been to enough to have a clear
> idea of what the crowd patterns are, but I think earlier in the
> Halloweekend season has lower crowds.
+1. First friday of Halloweekends is now mandatory for us, assuming
we're in town. Walk-ons to Maverick at night FTW!
mamoosh
> +1. First friday of Halloweekends is now mandatory for us, assuming
> we're in town. Walk-ons to Maverick at night FTW!
What're you doing on RRC? Don't you have some coasters to guess?
Well....?
BaSSiStiSt
This round was too hard for me! I got stuck on the first one and gave
up! :-) And no way I'm getting the last one.
mamoosh
> This round was too hard for me! I got stuck on the first one and gave
> up! :-) And no way I'm getting the last one.
Did you ever thing of typing the name of the sponsor in the RCDB
search window? I practically gave the name of #1 away. As for the
last...Lisa knows. Not sure what her price is though :)
Coastin Steve
disappointed in it.
I was expecting airtime similar to those rides and it doesn't even
come close.
And as far as the first drop goes, the breakover at the top is so
gradual and the pullout at the bottom use up so much of the 300 ft, it
doesn't seem like you're at the 80 degrees for any real distance.
I would bet that most of the 200 ft + coasters have more feet of
straight track at the drop angle the MF does.
( I wonder how that can be checked / figured out )
Coastin Steve
http://community.webtv.net/Coastin_Steve/FlyingTurnsFotosbyCS
David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
Not on that Friday! That's that park's coaster event! It's PACKED!
But most enthusiasts who've been around for a while know that the weekdays
before the event are some of the slowest days of the year at CP.
It will be interesting to see what Holiday World's event being on the same
day will do to attendance at CP's event.
mamoosh
<davidhhhSTOPS...@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
> It will be interesting to see what Holiday World's event being on the same
> day will do to attendance at CP's event.
With all due respect to Holiday World, I'm hoping Coastermania will be
the big draw and that attendence at HoliWood Night will be lower
because both events are on the same weekend. But that's a totally self-
serving wish...I'll be at HoliWood Nights :- )
David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
wrote:
I'm with ya on that one! Probably literally, this year. ;-)
I wonder if we'll also see a lot of people show up mid-day on Saturday for
HWN. (I doubt many people will make the morning water park ERT after late
night ERT at CP and the long drive, though I'm sure a small handful will.)
Even for part of one day at HW, HWN is still a great deal, when you
consider it's 3 hours of nighttime ERT on three of the best woodies on the
planet, including the #1. And it certainly beats a crowded Saturday at CP.
I could easily see at least some enthusiasts who are already traveling to
the Midwest opting to try to hit both events.
Keith Hopkins
news:6582dbad-36da-4ce8...@e37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> I like Millie, although I have not ridden since 2001. My very first
> ride in 2000 was very late in the evening, back row, and the bottom
> half of the first drop was pitch black. That environment and lack of
> sight references gave the wonderful illusion the drop was much
> steeper
> than 80* and much longer than 300-feet. My first front-seat ride was
> in 2001. As we crested the lift it started to pour and I spent the
> entire ride covering my face from the sting of the raindrops. So
> much
> for any POV, lol.
Quick, someone post the Flaherty/Gilooly pic!
--
Keith Hopkins
suss...@sssssssssgmail.ssssssssscom
[clear up the hissing to email]
"Perverts make the very best Scolds."
Mrs. Betty Bowers
Andrew Brawley
<suss...@sssssssssgmail.ssssssssscom> wrote:
>"mamoosh" <msul...@ntmllc.com> wrote in message
>news:6582dbad-36da-4ce8...@e37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> I like Millie, although I have not ridden since 2001. My very first
>> ride in 2000 was very late in the evening, back row, and the bottom
>> half of the first drop was pitch black. That environment and lack of
>> sight references gave the wonderful illusion the drop was much
>> steeper
>> than 80* and much longer than 300-feet. My first front-seat ride was
>> in 2001. As we crested the lift it started to pour and I spent the
>> entire ride covering my face from the sting of the raindrops. So
>> much
>> for any POV, lol.
>
>
>Quick, someone post the Flaherty/Gilooly pic!
First thing that came to my mind.