General Carowinds discussion
#77979
After giving it some thought, if Carowinds were getting rid of Thunder Road to make room for something AMAZING and EPIC, then I might be OK with it. But for a water park expansion or a water coaster? That doesn't sound amazing to me at all. And I guess if they are having issues with the cost of keeping TR, then they should come out and say that's one of the reasons or what the reasons are just so everyone knows. I wouldn't stop going to the park if I were local to the area, but I would still like to know. Even still, I hardly think TR is holding the park back from becoming a destination park if it were to stay.

My favorite times on TR was when one went forward and backward. I LOVED (do you hear me??) L O V E D riding TR backwards! There was just something about the feeling and a lot of people hated going backwards. I thought it was awesome - But there was hardly ever a line; that was another thing I loved. You could get on the ride pretty quickly........so I guess that could be part of the reason as well. But this was in the 1990s....
#77982
mark40511 wrote:After giving it some thought, if Carowinds were getting rid of Thunder Road to make room for something AMAZING and EPIC, then I might be OK with it. But for a water park expansion or a water coaster?

I'd actually be okay with a water coaster if it was along the lines of JTA at Seaworld Orlando or Poseidon at Europa Park. Much of my initial disappointment for TR's removal came from thinking the ride would just be replaced by a few waterslides, but if the ride is going to be a water coaster from Mack, then I support the decision (kind of). If Carowinds want to rip out a huge chunk of county fair, a huge, decently themed water coaster is the only way IMO to justify it.
#77983
if the removal is indeed for a log flume like what has been hinted at by barbie and coasterbruh, then it really doesnt make much sense. They removed a log flume to make way for an out and back coaster only to remove an out and back coaster to make room for a log flume. Also a good log flume needs scenery, snuggled in the middle of a wooded area is preferred imo. Not sitting out in the middle of a parking lot.
#77987
^ what do you consider maintenance?
chknwing wrote:if the removal is indeed for a log flume like what has been hinted at by barbie and coasterbruh, then it really doesnt make much sense. They removed a log flume to make way for an out and back coaster only to remove an out and back coaster to make room for a log flume. Also a good log flume needs scenery, snuggled in the middle of a wooded area is preferred imo. Not sitting out in the middle of a parking lot.


The fact that you are looking at intimidator as just an out and back coaster is a problem in itself lol. Didn't you just repost a concept of a flume ride that didn't go thru a wooden area?
#77989
coasterbruh wrote:^ what do you consider maintenance?
chknwing wrote:if the removal is indeed for a log flume like what has been hinted at by barbie and coasterbruh, then it really doesnt make much sense. They removed a log flume to make way for an out and back coaster only to remove an out and back coaster to make room for a log flume. Also a good log flume needs scenery, snuggled in the middle of a wooded area is preferred imo. Not sitting out in the middle of a parking lot.


The fact that you are looking at intimidator as just an out and back coaster is a problem in itself lol. Didn't you just repost a concept of a flume ride that didn't go thru a wooden area?


I said mike posted it and asked if it could be a hint. not saying thats what I wanted.
#77990
Log Flume had unrepairable leaks, the park tried several different methods but nothing seem to stick. Short of replacing the entire fiberglass flume like KI did, Log Flume was "beyond repair". At least when Log Flume was replaced, it was by an outstanding coaster.
#77992
^ right on roller!
chknwing wrote:
coasterbruh wrote:^ what do you consider maintenance?
chknwing wrote:if the removal is indeed for a log flume like what has been hinted at by barbie and coasterbruh, then it really doesnt make much sense. They removed a log flume to make way for an out and back coaster only to remove an out and back coaster to make room for a log flume. Also a good log flume needs scenery, snuggled in the middle of a wooded area is preferred imo. Not sitting out in the middle of a parking lot.


The fact that you are looking at intimidator as just an out and back coaster is a problem in itself lol. Didn't you just repost a concept of a flume ride that didn't go thru a wooden area?


I said mike posted it and asked if it could be a hint. not saying thats what I wanted.

the point I was making was it doesn't take a forest to make a good flume ride...universal and disney...hell even sea world parks have proven this.
#77993
I honestly feel that Cedar Fair doesn't know what it means to be from THE SOUTH. EVERYTHING is iconic and historic and has some type of sentimental value. Whether it is TR or the Hardee's that you grew up going to every Sunday for breakfast. :lol:

Personally, I wonder what Uncle Jerry is thinking right now. Does he get much say these days in the decisions that happen at the park?
#77995
If the park really wants the GP to get behind tearing down TR, then they need to periodically have it "get stuck" on the lift hill, have people send photos of it "stuck" on the lift hill to WSOC, and then let WSOC share stories about how dangerous TR is with all the times of getting "stuck" . Then the GP will beg for it to be torn down like they have with Fury.
#77997
chknwing wrote:if the removal is indeed for a log flume like what has been hinted at by barbie and coasterbruh, then it really doesnt make much sense. They removed a log flume to make way for an out and back coaster only to remove an out and back coaster to make room for a log flume. Also a good log flume needs scenery, snuggled in the middle of a wooded area is preferred imo. Not sitting out in the middle of a parking lot.

Who's barbie? I would like to meet her.....
I think that I may take a trip to the beach today just so that I can ride Swampfox....Not!! :lolno:
#78001
Here are my two cents on this issue. I think the park is purposely leading us down the wrong 'road' on this. I don't think TR is going away completely. I found it strange when they hinted at next year's attraction so early. They never, ever do that. It was an attempt send us down the water park expansion rumor mill whenever they announced the TR closing. By using the word 'splash', they knew we would assume TR was leaving for a water park expansion. But as someone alluded to, 'big splash' is not always specific to water. Or it could mean something major is about to happen in the water park and clearly with a opening through TR, and a water park expansion on the other side, the ride would be sitting right smack in the middle of Soak City.

Since re-branding older rides seems to be the new trend in the industry, perhaps TR's time has arrived. They started last year at The Point, but our Vortex appears to be too small for this to happen. Maybe they have some interesting things in mind for an out and back racer.

It does not make sense to remove the ride when there are so many work-arounds. Carowinds is no stranger to building bridges and tunnels in the park. Sink a section of TR into a tunnel and build a bridge over to the other side. Why would they spend millions of dollars and years rebuilding a coaster and simply scrap it? We could be seeing the final phase of the TR rehab work about to begin.

Personally, this all seems like a masterfully orchestrated PR plan. You got the web exploding, folk putting up petitions, people planning finally rides, (certainly helps with this years park numbers, doesn't it?) and more importantly, this has knocked Fury stopping on the life hill right out of the news cycle.

Ok, Carowinds, when I retire in two years, I 'm more than willing to relocate and work as your PR director for free. All I will require is a season pass, a meal plan and a cabin at the camp grounds. What a great way to retire. :D
  • 1
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 80