John Peck wrote:I'm not trying to start an argument, and I understand that the park doesn't have that much space, but I just find it odd that they are converting a perfectly good wood coaster like Roar (aside from the jackhammering) over to the RMC treatment. I just feel that there are other rides in the chain that need RMC'd well before this one, and I'm sad to see what I thought was a decent wood coaster go away, as opposed to some recent ones that really needed something done with them. That's just a personal opinion, again, not trying to start anything.
Here's some things to consider...
1. Roar is not "perfectly good" anymore. Last time I rode it, it was approaching Gwazi levels of roughness. (home park biased locals seem to disagree, but take that for what it's worth.)
2. SFDK is also a 'year round' park now. Six Flags seems to be doing this RMC treatment first mostly with parks that are year-round or close to it to get the most out of their investment. SFOT, SFFT, SFM, SFMM, SFDK all have very long operating calendars. SFNE is the only wood coaster re-do that doesn't fall in this category.
3. Turning Roar into an RMC is pretty much a slam dunk to make a C+ coaster into an A+ coaster. Why would someone argue against doing this?
4. To entirely fix Roar to be as smooth and as enjoyable as it was when it opened, would probably cost not that much less than having RMC come in and re-do it, and the marking value for an RMC re-do is MUCH greater then just re-tracking it.
I can think of two coasters that recently underwent "complete re-trackings" and just a short time after, are no longer with us: Gwazi & Thunder Road. So clearly those are two examples that show that an investment like that doesn't always pay off. Gwazi was a good example. They re-tracked it and got new trains, and they had marketed it as being better, even did a media event for it, and that lasted about a moth. And clearly Thunder Road didn't prove to get much more ridership out of it otherwise it might still be standing today.