MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[Tha Realest]

With the size of Galaxy’s Edge you could do two of these. Bring back the Jedi Academy for one. Then you could even do a Sith experience on the other end near the Empire’s shuttle.

I am way more on board with what Disney is doing these days. The one thing I wish they would reintroduce is streetmosphere. I loved all that and really felt like it livened up the parks.

Jedi are so passé. Give me an adult cocktail party setting where we can watch CMs portraying Mon Mothma and Luthen have quiet discussions about the nascent rebellion.

 

[ToTBellHop]

I keep seeing comments about “shareholders” on this board.

I have not seen the financial benefits of any of Disney leadership’s creative decisions.

I have. The lack of anything new of substance in 2026 is saving me money since I won't be coming to WDW.

 

[Dreamer19]

I have. The lack of anything new of substance in 2026 is saving me money since I won't be coming to WDW.

I’m all for expansion. It’s too bad they don’t have the money…

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ֊ᗩζᗩᗰ]

What is "better" for the guest depends on how you measure what is "better".

I would imagine GSATs on this corner of the park will improve. Guest spending certainly will. Smiles per hour? We will see.

Certainly true, though I said betterment of the park. It may or may not be better for the guest. Though, I can't imagine what it's replacing will be any worse for the guest experience. I'm sure those GSATS will more than speak for that.

I repeat, what is the capacity of the new rides? You state as a fact that the new rides will have a higher capacity, so you must know the capacity of the new rides, otherwise it would just be your opinion.

You only need look at the capacity of a simple spinner ride and the likes of Radiator Spring Racers to know this will be a substantial improvement over a riverboat that was rarely at capacity or an island visited by more squirrels than guests. Letting nostalgia cloud your judgement doesn't mean the concept isn't good for the park and it's guests. Look at logistically.

 

[ToTBellHop]

You only need look at the capacity of a simple spinner ride and the likes of Radiator Spring Racers to know this will be a substantial improvement over a riverboat that was rarely at capacity or an island visited by more squirrels than guests. Letting nostalgia cloud your judgement doesn't mean the concept isn't good for the park and it's guests. Look at logistically.

I would like to the see the SSATs (squirrel satisfaction) before commenting further.

And no one is thinking of the ducks. No one.

 

[DisneyHead123]

611 pages in, and I still see the same people repeating the same ridiculous talking points: "waste of space", "underutilized space", "good business move", etc, etc. Unless you're a Disney employee or own Disney stock, why do you care about that? What impact does that have on your park experience? If you're someone that says "I love Cars, looking forward to this area" or "I am excited for something new at MK", then I can respect that, because you are giving an opinion based on your enjoyment of the parks. The average guest shouldn't care about whats "best for business" for Disney.

I think it depends on what the reason is. I agree that helping Disney’s bottom line isn’t a concern for park goers. That said, I do think things like spreading out crowds, increasing capacity, even just adding IP that a lot of people will really enjoy can benefit everyone. (I mean hey, it doesn’t always have to be about me, if something is going to make millions of hearts happy then great, right?) That’s why I have mixed feelings on this one. There are certainly good things about it but at the end of the day I still feel they’re replacing something iconic with something that, while fun, is still talking cars admired mostly by young children.

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ֊ᗩζᗩᗰ]

I think it depends on what the reason is. I agree that helping Disney’s bottom line isn’t a concern for park goers. That said, I do think things like spreading out crowds, increasing capacity, even just adding IP that a lot of people will really enjoy can benefit everyone. (I mean hey, it doesn’t always have to be about me, if something is going to make millions of hearts happy then great, right?) That’s why I have mixed feelings on this one. There are certainly good things about it but at the end of the day I still feel they’re replacing something iconic with something that, while fun, is still talking cars admired mostly by young children.

That is a fair assessment.

 

[MisterPenguin]

What is the hourly capacity of the new Cars rides?

European or African?

 

[Casper Gutman]

A lot of posters are desperate to constrain their thinking along the false lines Disney is pushing. Here are some key truths:

Disney has enormous amounts of control over where guests go.

Disney World has huge amounts of available space.

If Disney World removes an attraction to build a new one, it is because Disney WANTS to remove the attraction.

Expanding capacity without removing capacity is the best way to have more capacity.

The Florida parks are full of ABANDONED spaces that are detrimental to the experience of the park.

Theme parks NEED “underutilized” space.

Theme park rides ARE IPs.

The attractions that built Disney Resorts’ popularity and made it an integral part of the zeitgeist were park-original IPs.

Business executives are not omniscient. They are not even wise.

These statements are all truth. Disney and certain posters would like to spin and gaslight them away. Don’t let them.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

European or African?

I don't know! Aaaaaahhhhhh!

 

[Chi84]

It seems people are desperate to establish their positions as truth or have their opinions validated by others.

Calling an opinion fact or truth doesn’t make it such. It’s okay to disagree without getting so heated.

 

[Casper Gutman]

There is an incredibly powerful impulse among humans - and it is amplified in Americans - to imagine that everything is and always will be “normal” and that change never happens. Therefore, if something is happening, it must be OK simply by virtue of it happening. Even if a few years and a lot of gradual changes ago the thing would have been unthinkable, even if it would have once caused fury or despair, even if the individual specifically condemned the unthinkable thing. And since everything is always normal, anyone who says it isn’t is clearly crazy and possibly nefarious.

I am talking, of course, about Disney removing Muppets and Rivers of America.

 

[Casper Gutman]

It seems people are desperate to establish their positions as truth or have their opinions validated by others.

Calling an opinion fact or truth doesn’t make it such. It’s okay to disagree without getting so heated.

None of what I wrote is really debatable (except, perhaps that executives aren’t wise or that abandoned spaces are detrimental). At most, one might quibble with some adjective choices. Now, the conclusions one draws from all that might differ. But if a position relies on dismissing the truth, it is not a tenable position.

 

[lazyboy97o]

But if people haven’t been visiting those attractions when headliners go down, what makes you think they will start doing it now?

I suppose Disney could have revamped those two attractions to make them more exciting but my guess is they didn’t think it would help. They were allowed to decline because of lack of use, not the other way around.

It’s hard to reconcile what I read here with what’s being said on the other threads as to what kind of capacity MK needs.

The parks were designed in a different age when the pace of life was more relaxed. Whether Disney’s decisions drove changes in guests’ expectations or guests’ changing expectations led to Disney’s decisions is an open debate that will likely never be agreed upon.

Magic Kingdom is the park best able to handle downtime. But again, the nature of the attractions was such that there wouldn’t be a notable difference in wait times even when being utilized as an alternative. There are certain attractions that you want to have available for people to use on the next cycle.

Disney just built Journey of Water at Epcot. There’s no reason that type of updated interactive experience would not have worked at Magic Kingdom, even on Tom Sawyer Island. Some better signage would also probably help.

I feel the need to reiterate that the Magic Kingdom, the world’s most visited theme park, has abandoned dining space and still has less dining capacity than it did in 1993. There is no lack of demand or need for dining at Magic Kingdom. It is something that directly generates revenue and the need is plainly clear to anyone who visits. Despite that, Disney has convinced themselves it is not needed. People keep assuming some deeply rational, just business basis that does not exist.

 

[truecoat]

What is the hourly capacity of the new Cars rides?

Six. It goes around the track for an hour and there's only one car..

 

[Chi84]

Magic Kingdom is the park best able to handle downtime. But again, the nature of the attractions was such that there wouldn’t be a notable difference in wait times even when being utilized as an alternative. There are certain attractions that you want to have available for people to use on the next cycle.

Disney just built Journey of Water at Epcot. There’s no reason that type of updated interactive experience would not have worked at Magic Kingdom, even on Tom Sawyer Island. Some better signage would also probably help.

I feel the need to reiterate that the Magic Kingdom, the world’s most visited theme park, has abandoned dining space and still has less dining capacity than it did in 1993. There is no lack of demand or need for dining at Magic Kingdom. It is something that directly generates revenue and the need is plainly clear to anyone who visits. Despite that, Disney has convinced themselves it is not needed. People keep assuming some deeply rational, just business basis that does not exist.

I didn’t say their decisions were just or deeply rational, only that there are reasons for what they decide to do.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I didn’t say their decisions were just or deeply rational, only that there are reasons for what they decide to do.

There’s a reason the park hasn’t replaced all of its lost dining capacity. It’s clearly not a good reason. The same is true with attractions.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Six. It goes around the track for an hour and there's only one car..

 

[Chi84]

There’s a reason the park hasn’t replaced all of its lost dining capacity. It’s clearly not a good reason. The same is true with attractions.

What’s been lost in dining? I know Tomorrowland Terrace but that’s been the way it is forever.

 

[doctornick]

611 pages in, and I still see the same people repeating the same ridiculous talking points: "waste of space", "underutilized space", "good business move", etc, etc. Unless you're a Disney employee or own Disney stock, why do you care about that? What impact does that have on your park experience? If you're someone that says "I love Cars, looking forward to this area" or "I am excited for something new at MK", then I can respect that, because you are giving an opinion based on your enjoyment of the parks. The average guest shouldn't care about whats "best for business" for Disney.

While I don't necessarily agree with the planned changes to MK (for me, my main complaint is based more on the IP used rather than the execution; I think something more harmonious with Frontierland like Chip & Dale or Humphrey the Bear would be appropriate over Cars), I think there is some clear objective upside for all guests. Having a better guest flow with the new walking paths being the biggest improvement especially with a greater presence of parades. I also think that, for better or worse, more overall guests will get more overall enjoyment from the Cars attractions than they do from the Liberty Belle/TSI.