Jump to content

Hot Wheels Sidewinder Refurbishment


Tin Foil Hat
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Spike said:

Sadface. I’ve missed you Alexb. Back to discussion of Hot Wheels, is anyone actually going to miss the Hot Wheels Partnership? 

The Hot Wheels IP had absolutely no impact on the ride experience. If you want my opinion, it was an absolute waste. 

Edited by Zanstabar
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Gazza said:

At the time though I think everyone was pretty happy that the coaster wasn't going to be scrapped, since most of us hadn't had the chance to ride it.

And despite not really fitting the site, the bargain for a full sized coaster available immediately would be too good to pass up.

This all said, would you even call it a terrain coaster?

Yes it was a bargain and yay a new coaster. But they really doubled down on the bargain by plonking it in the car park. It’s really the Scream (SFMM) of Australia coasters. 
 

I’d consider any coaster that has a custom layout to fit an existing space a terrain style coaster. 
It wrapped over buildings and snuck through gaps that existed between existing structures and the cliff so yes I’d call it terrain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a massive fan of the ride, but I must admit I like really like how the area around it has grown and how it feels like it belongs now. It's neat that the area has filled in, and there's some nice creative elements that make the coaster feel at home in a way it really didn't when it was built. The water slide tower in the middle of the helix being the obvious pinnacle. I agree it should nowt have been the signature coaster for 20 years, but I like how the area has grown to make it fit in.

 

Seriously when it was built you could really tell that the ride wasn't meant for where it was built. 100% a terrain coaster, and as much as it was a good pickup at the time, in the early days it really stuck out in a bad way and didn't fit at all. These days with the way they've built around it it fits in like it's meant to be there.

 

I love when different rides interact, I think it makes things so much cooler. I mean there's nothing exciting about the placement of GL or Arkham, but Corkscrew dove under the monorail track, and it really added something, particularly when you were on it and there was a train going through. The same would be true if they'd stuck with the original plan of putting a ride in Superman's helix.

 

If I had to put it in marketing terms that our parks could understand I'd say 'The proximity of different attractions in any one precinct provides for world class, dynamic interaction, enhancing the experience and providing for organic iconic promotional hero images, and instagramable moments for guests to share, assisting in the creation of sharable viral content. World class. *orgasm noises*'.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joz said:

I mean there's nothing exciting about the placement of GL or Arkham, but Corkscrew dove under the monorail track, and it really added something, particularly when you were on it and there was a train going through. The same would be true if they'd stuck with the original plan of putting a ride in Superman's helix.

I agree with everything you said, except the GL comment. GL is perfect utilisation of space. Fitting such a compact coaster in that spot is great and it doesn't need to interact with any ride or area as it wraps around itself enough and there are plenty of viewing angles of it.

GL next to DC is an awesome view from the carpark and highway also. But yes, Superman and Arkham leave a lot to be desired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Naazon said:

I agree with everything you said, except the GL comment. GL is perfect utilisation of space. Fitting such a compact coaster in that spot is great and it doesn't need to interact with any ride or area as it wraps around itself enough and there are plenty of viewing angles of it.

GL next to DC is an awesome view from the carpark and highway also. But yes, Superman and Arkham leave a lot to be desired.

Hopefully we don't have to wait too much longer until AA is retired, that will leave a lot of space to work with. So that leads me to my next question for @Bikash Randhawa , in the event that Arkham Asylum retires, is there any set plans for that area that are already in place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Naazon said:

I agree with everything you said, except the GL comment. GL is perfect utilisation of space. Fitting such a compact coaster in that spot is great and it doesn't need to interact with any ride or area as it wraps around itself enough and there are plenty of viewing angles of it.

GL next to DC is an awesome view from the carpark and highway also. But yes, Superman and Arkham leave a lot to be desired.

GL next to Rivals does look fantastic but until Rivals was built, it looked like they had just left a coaster out on the curb for council collection.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Green Lantern, that was just plonked out the front of the park, and doesn't even have it's own bridge across the creek to it and whose exit path haphazardly uses the main entry bridge is well integrated because there's a coaster next to it which totally dwarfs it?

 

I mean you do you, but I think if you think GL is well implemented you're wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Spike said:

 I’d argue that Green Lantern was more of a Carpark Coaster than Cyclone.

You think a coaster, that was built over a carpark, the linemarkings of which you can still see today, which only later had other rides and slides spring up around it, is less of a carpark coaster than a coaster that was built over grass?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GL isn't a Carpark coaster, GL is an unimaginative lump of meh shoehorned in. Cyclone is largely the same but the area around it fits it now (Northern half is still a bit what ever but the lower southern half works well).

 

Also can we not do a competition on pedantocness on yhe definitions of Carpark coaster v road coaster v grassy knoll coaster because no one cares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.