It's just a shame Paramount couldn't wait five, three, even one year before embarking on a hyper-woodie. I think a Son of Beast built in 2002 would have fared much differently than the one opened in 2000. That would also require that Paramount was willing to invest, though, and that actually seems less likely to have been the case in later years.

They sure were ambitious though.. I'll give 'em that!

It's just a shame Paramount couldn't wait five, three, even one year before embarking on a hyper-woodie. I think a Son of Beast built in 2002 would have fared much differently than the one opened in 2000. That would also require that Paramount was willing to invest, though, and that actually seems less likely to have been the case in later years.

SOB could have worked when built - if they would have followed the designer's instructions and not cut corners to save money.

Cutting corners surely didn't help, but what amount of investment could've made a traditional woodie of that size into a pleasant experience at the time? If they had followed the designer's instructions to the letter and poured in twice as much money as they did, they'd still have a 200 foot tall wooden roller coaster that delivered a very rough experience.

It's telling that, even in the 15 years since where most of the top ten woodies are supplemented by Iron Horse track or made of pre-fab wood that deliver steel-like experience, still no one has topped Son of Beast's attempts at height or speed. And that's with glass-smooth track and unparalleled technological backing. I just don't think Son of Beast stood a chance being made by that manufacturer at that time. Paramount certainly compounded the problem and dug a hole for itself and Cedar Fair, but I can't imagine many parallel universes where Son of Beast is a top ten coaster.

Now, if they'd had the patience, wherewithal, and funds to wait a few years and see the incredible advances we'd have in "wooden" coaster technology through experienced manufacturers, Son of Beast may be around today, and as revered as El Toro, New Texas Giant, or Colossos. We'll never know!

And ironically.....the "rough experience" was my favorite part.

And ironically.....the "rough experience" was my favorite part.

Hey, I liked it too.

But one question to ask is, at what point does it stop being enjoyable to a large enough chunk of people that it's not worth the cost to operate it (keeping in mind that Son of Beast had an unusually high cost)?

And the more important question is, at what point is it irresponsible or unreasonable to allow people to ride it? What kind of warning can you give? Do announcements in the station that it is a "highly aggressive" thrill ride really portray the ride experience for as intense as it is? What about the fact that Son of Beast and Backlot Stunt Coaster are both "5 / 5" in a Rider Safety Guide?

Some people like ultra-intense things but Son of Beast was an unusual case.

Lol....I wasn't disagreeing with your first statement, just making my own.

Go on YouTube and look up coaster built by RCCA (I know KI finished SOB, but RCCA had their hand in it). The video shows all of those machines have that jack-hammering ride.

I blame the mother!

First, I know I'm going to get a LOT of heat for this...but...I'd personally love to see a Rocky Mountain treatment on The Beast.

Imagine, keep the first tunnel where it's at...but make the lift steeper and the first drop taller. Naturally this would also give the first drop into the tunnel a much steeper drop. Then come out of the tunnel into an upward over-banked turn, crest the next hill and drop again (steeper of course). So on and so...I feel like a re-do for The Beast, by Rocky Mountain, would be amazing and a HUGE opportunity to re-market/re-launch the ride.

Just a thought.

-T

I see your point..but honestly keep wood coasters wood coasters. If it was built a hybrid, fine, but keep the historical wood ones what they actually are.

No heat, opinions are exactly that, however I'm one to side on the side of nostalgia at times..

I always thought of have a Beast "extension" - after the shed's brake run, go straight instead of turning....go down the hill, adding about 4,000 more feet of track, then back to the turn, through the first tunnel and onward.

It's just a thought.

Another major factor in Son of Beast's demise was the trains. Neither the original nor replacement trains were ideal for such a giant wooden coaster.

I always thought of have a Beast "extension" - after the shed's brake run, go straight instead of turning....go down the hill, adding about 4,000 more feet of track, then back to the turn, through the first tunnel and onward.

It's just a thought.

Kings Island would be foolish to not consider this proposition.

Believe it or not, I have also thought of something similar to this idea...It is true what they say, great minds do think alike.

I always thought of have a Beast "extension" - after the shed's brake run, go straight instead of turning....go down the hill, adding about 4,000 more feet of track, then back to the turn, through the first tunnel and onward.

It's just a thought.

Kings Island would be foolish not consider this proposition.

Believe it or not, I have also though of something similar to this idea...It is true what they say, great minds do think alike.

Speak for yourself!

No, just kidding.

I really don't think they should ever mess with any coaster once it's built - kinda like Christmas Carols...don't change the words! But, there are times when things are not very good and re-dos are called for.

The Beast does not need a re-do, and it would be a mortal sin to touch Racer.

However, my extension thought (I should get it patented) remains in my mind - if I ran the zoo....

I think a new woodie would fit perfectly in the park. I wish we could get something like GoldStriker out at CGA, it looks like such a good ride.

As long as we get a version that has a first drop that actually goes all the way down.

THUNDERHEAD!!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If and when The Bat reaches the end of its service life, (most likely at least a few years off), I'd like to see a wooden coaster in its place. I'd make it A REAL traditional wooden coaster not a laser-cut "smooth as silk" job or a "hybrid." A real wooden coaster has those little bumps and rattles. That is what makes a wooden coaster different than a steel coaster. The environment is beautiful and the terrain would benefit the coaster's construction. Before anyone thinks "steel" first, remember that the park's newest existing wooden coaster just turned 35.

^We already have 3 traditional woodies that have "those little bumps and rattles"...

Say if KI were to build a new woodie sometime in the far-off future, why not get with the times and use that "laser-cut" or topper-track technology to their advantage?

Have you ridden El Toro? Outlaw Run? The fact that they are ultra smooth does not detract from the experience, trust me.

And Even if Outlaw Run arguably isn't really wooden, the GP would most certainly still refer to it as such.

Just my opinion...

S

First, I know I'm going to get a LOT of heat for this...but...I'd personally love to see a Rocky Mountain treatment on The Beast.

Imagine, keep the first tunnel where it's at...but make the lift steeper and the first drop taller. Naturally this would also give the first drop into the tunnel a much steeper drop. Then come out of the tunnel into an upward over-banked turn, crest the next hill and drop again (steeper of course). So on and so...I feel like a re-do for The Beast, by Rocky Mountain, would be amazing and a HUGE opportunity to re-market/re-launch the ride.

Just a thought.

-T

Yeah I wont blame you for your idea, but its wrong! No just kidding ideas cant be wrong. The Rocky Mountain treatment would be great for a ride that needs rehabbed. Beast does not need this treatment, IMO.

Despite my username I loved SOB but everything Terp said was correct. I would love an Intamin wood coaster soooo much though! ( or steel...). Gerstlauer or Mack would be great compact coasters that pack a punch too. I would really like to see a Euro fighter the most right now though (sorry if that is too off topic). I am sleep deprived and have been hitting the sauce so if I have copyright errors or grammar mistakes by all means lemme know!

We need to get off the belief that KI's next woodie will be confused with Son of Beast. Even though SoB was a troubled ride, it was evolutionary in many ways and to many people a fantastic ride. If we had this mindset for everything, we would not progress in any aspects of life. You live and you learn. It's just in this scenario it was a rather expensive lesson.

We have two full-sized wooden coasters and one wooden kiddie coaster, all built in the 70's. I'm saying I like wooden coasters because of the traditional bumps and out of control feeling they provide. My problem with pre-fabs and hybrids is that the experience could be made just as easily on a steel coaster. Don't get me wrong, I don't like a rough ride but one that only a properly maintained wooden coaster can deliver.

Double post sorry

Hopefully this is in the plans as we speak.

Still hoping. This is two years old. Have gears been turning?

After reading this I feel strongly that there is no reason why a ride built like that bull coaster at six flags new jersey could not be 50' taller.

I think one of the main reasons SOB was so rough was that the entire thing was in a turn. If they built a 214 foot tall wooden coaster as an out and back it wouldn't be nearly as rough.

It'd probably still be pretty bad. I remember the first drop pressing down painfully.. just not as long of a duratiom as the bottoms on the Rose Bowl

...The problem with Kings Island getting another woodie, as many have brought up, is capacity.  Then again, Kings Island does have the likes of Backlot, Firehawk and Invertigo which aren't exactly stellar in capacity either.  Sometimes you have to forego capacity to add in a little variety...  

Why not have both?