Replacement for Tomorrowland Speedway?

[Daveeeeed]

I edited that comment before you posted this. Please read it, it actually addresses your comment that I'm quoting.

I'll agree to disagree with you. Adult rides and kid rides can be the same. It's what makes up the MK. They aren't rides where you're watching your kid.. they're rides that all can enjoy, with or without kids in the party. A 4 year old can love space mountain and a 40 year old can love space mountain, same with Haunted Mansion, and pirates, and so on. That is creating "rides that appeal to all".

Space Mountain has a height requirement... 44 inches and many adults past 50 get motion sick from it.


What separates Disney is the theming and the combination of rides that people can enjoy together like Pirates, or rides that part of a group or all of a group (depending on interest).

What separates Disney, you can deny this if you want to but that does not make it right, is the theming paired with the combination of rides for all and rides based on interest and other variables.

It's a shame that you are resorting to comparing Cedar Fair to Disney as you are still ignoring my point -- there is nothing wrong with a highly themed thrilling coaster in a Disney park. From Expedition severest to Tron. It works with a combination... even Walt believed that.

What you are more or less saying is Universal's way (it's a horrible park for little kids) as it has epic theming like Disney and world class rides, the difference is all of them have height requirements...


Combination is key -- that's the point you are missing. Disney will never do that, but some experiences are best to not be enjoyed by little kids. Again, a combination is key to cater to different groups.

If I wanted to go to the Magic Kingdom with my friends we would all want to have a very good Coaster like RRC.

You're argument is not getting any better.

 

[PorterRedkey]

Space Mountain has a height requirement... 44 inches and many adults past 50 get motion sick from it.


What separates Disney is the theming and the combination of rides that people can enjoy together like Pirates, or rides that part of a group or all of a group (depending on interest).

What separates Disney, you can deny this if you want to but that does not make it right, is the theming paired with the combination of rides for all and rides based on interest and other variables.

It's a shame that you are resorting to comparing Cedar Fair to Disney as you are still ignoring my point -- there is nothing wrong with a highly themed thrilling coaster in a Disney park. From Expedition severest to Tron. It works with a combination... even Walt believed that.

What you are more or less saying is Universal's way (it's a horrible park for little kids) as it has epic theming like Disney and world class rides, the difference is all of them have height requirements...


Combination is key -- that's the point you are missing. Disney will never do that, but some experiences are best to not be enjoyed by little kids. Again, a combination is key to cater to different groups.

If I wanted to go to the Magic Kingdom with my friends we would all want to have a very good Coaster like RRC.

You're argument is not getting any better.

Don't be too hard on @21stamps. He is a valued contributor here. I don't think he is trying to "make you look like an idiot".

Not all rides need to be thrilling for adults, like RnR or ToT. Some kids can handle that, but other kids work up to those rides.

Walt was more about a family experiencing a Tiki Bird serenade, an adventure with Snow White, Mr. Toad goes to hell etc...
Even the Matterhorn was mild enough for the younger kids.

 

[21stamps]

Space Mountain has a height requirement... 44 inches and many adults past 50 get motion sick from it.


What separates Disney is the theming and the combination of rides that people can enjoy together like Pirates, or rides that part of a group or all of a group (depending on interest).

What separates Disney, you can deny this if you want to but that does not make it right, is the theming paired with the combination of rides for all and rides based on interest and other variables.

It's a shame that you are resorting to comparing Cedar Fair to Disney as you are still ignoring my point -- there is nothing wrong with a highly themed thrilling coaster in a Disney park. From Expedition severest to Tron. It works with a combination... even Walt believed that.

What you are more or less saying is Universal's way (it's a horrible park for little kids) as it has epic theming like Disney and world class rides, the difference is all of them have height requirements...


Combination is key -- that's the point you are missing.

Yes, 44" is the requirement for a lot of "Family Coasters" at amusement parks.

48" and up starts the "thrill" rides.


My idea of the Magic Kingdom is that the same attractions appeal to all ages. Your's is that they need to provide more variety- with more restrictions, so all ages can enjoy different attractions.
Again, to me that's the same as any other amusement park and Uni/IoA. It's not what the MK has ever been. My sister and I are almost 8 years apart, my brother 3 years apart, we all enjoyed the same rides at MK growing up.

The other Disney parks do have 48" height requirements.. only 2, and that's fine, they aren't the Magic Kingdom.

So, I'll agree to disagree.

Perhaps you and your friends have outgrown MK at the moment, that's ok. It happens to a lot of us at some point, or to some degree (maybe not spending an entire day there) and then the nostalgia brings us back.. even though we still love our thrill coasters elsewhere.

 

[peter11435]

Yes, 44" is the requirement for a lot of "Family Coasters" at amusement parks.

48" and up starts the "thrill" rides.


My idea of the Magic Kingdom is that the same attractions appeal to all ages. Your's is that they need to provide more variety- with more restrictions, so all ages can enjoy different attractions.
Again, to me that's the same as any other amusement park and Uni/IoA. It's not what the MK has ever been. My sister and I are almost 8 years apart, my brother 3 years apart, we all enjoyed the same rides at MK growing up.

The other Disney parks do have 48" height requirements.. only 2, and that's fine, they aren't the Magic Kingdom.

So, I'll agree to disagree.

So 44 is ok but 48 is not?

 

[DDLand]

Not really. Don't forget that there are multiple sources of Magic Kingdom attendance.

1. New guests who would not have otherwise visited the Walt Disney World resort.
2. Passholders and cast members who buy their admission once (or get free admission) and then visit an "unlimited" number of times.
3. Walt Disney World guests who choose to visit Magic Kingdom instead of one of the other three parks.

You're only describing #1. #2 and 3 are where you run into problems. The absolute last thing Disney wants is further imbalance between Magic Kingdom attendance and the other three parks.

The already crowded and well loved Tokyo Disneyland and Tokyo Disney Sea are currently adding capacity and improving guest spaces. The stated goal of the expansions are primarily about improving guest experience and maximizing capacity. The realization that a total attendance of around 30 Million becoming the new normal prompted this change.

The Magic Kingdom seems like it's about to embrace a new normal that sees attendance at around 20 Million. It's by far the most critically important park in the chain, and perhaps Disney's single most important brand. I personally suspect that any new rides would be more than offset by the work done at DHS and other locations, any E Ticket will be all about increasing breathing room ahead of an anniversary that's sure to swamp the park.

As long as the Magic Kingdom is first clicking with 20 Million a year, it's going to be crowded. I doubt it can conceivably go much higher than this until the anniversary. They have to be approaching short term saturation.

They must keep pace with the rest of the industry, Magic Kingdom has perhaps the most embarrassingly poor roster quality of all Magic Kingdoms. It's old and needs refreshes and additions if it's to play in the same game as DHS, IOA, and Disneyland.

It's the crown jewel of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts. They treat it with such disregard, preferring to utilize it as a bank account to fund their many worldwide (and domestic) exploits.

They need to step up.

@Buried20KLeague I feel much the same way. I'm surprised by your experience with Tron. Was that Single Rider or standby? Usually Battle for the Sunken Treasure was significantly shorter and Tron would be longest in the park.

@21stamps Every Magic Kingdom has featured rides that could be considered not great for children. Hesitation with bringing kids on HM, PotC, and SM have always been there. I don't ever want truly awful attractions or giga coasters at a Castle Park, but there's enough room to add a more intense Everest level Coaster to the roster or a Battle for the Sunken Treasure. Either of those would be great at rounding out MK. Part of being a family park is realizing the diverse tastes of a family.

 

[21stamps]

Don't be too hard on @21stamps. He is a valued contributor here. I don't think he is trying to "make you look like an idiot".

Not all rides need to be thrilling for adults, like RnR or ToT. Some kids can handle that, but other kids work up to those rides.

Walt was more about a family experiencing a Tiki Bird serenade, an adventure with Snow White, Mr. Toad goes to hell etc...
Even the Matterhorn was mild enough for the younger kids.

"She" but thanks.lol

 

[21stamps]

So 44 is ok but 48 is not?

Maybe your kids grew extremely fast.lol.
But my answer is yes, for the obvious reason-Age.
Typically speaking, you're talking 4/5 year olds vs 6/7 year olds. There's a big difference between a 4 year old and a 7 year old..and now let's throw some siblings into the mix.. we're prolonging the "family" activities even farther out.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

You're argument is not getting any better.

Your trying to make me look like an idiot

 

[21stamps]

The already crowded and well loved Tokyo Disneyland and Tokyo Disney Sea are currently adding capacity and improving guest spaces. The stated goal of the expansions are primarily about improving guest experience and maximizing capacity. The realization that a total attendance of around 30 Million becoming the new normal prompted this change.

The Magic Kingdom seems like it's about to embrace a new normal that sees attendance at around 20 Million. It's by far the most critically important park in the chain, and perhaps Disney's single most important brand. I personally suspect that any new rides would be more than offset by the work done at DHS and other locations, any E Ticket will be all about increasing breathing room ahead of an anniversary that's sure to swamp the park.

As long as the Magic Kingdom is first clicking with 20 Million a year, it's going to be crowded. I doubt it can conceivably go much higher than this until the anniversary. They have to be approaching short term saturation.

They must keep pace with the rest of the industry, Magic Kingdom has perhaps the most embarrassingly poor roster quality of all Magic Kingdoms. It's old and needs refreshes and additions if it's to play in the same game as DHS, IOA, and Disneyland.

It's the crown jewel of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts. They treat it with such disregard, preferring to utilize it as a bank account to fund their many worldwide (and domestic) exploits.

They need to step up.

@Buried20KLeague I feel much the same way. I'm surprised by your experience with Tron. Was that Single Rider or standby? Usually Battle for the Sunken Treasure was significantly shorter and Tron would be longest in the park.

@21stamps Every Magic Kingdom has featured rides that could be considered not great for children. Hesitation with bringing kids on HM, PotC, and SM have always been there. I don't ever want truly awful attractions or giga coasters at a Castle Park, but there's enough room to add a more intense Everest level Coaster to the roster or a Battle for the Sunken Treasure. Either of those would be great at rounding out MK. Part of being a family park is realizing the diverse tastes of a family.

I agree with you. Diverse Family rides do not have to be IoA thrill rides which is the comment I responded to.
I think you were helpful in some of my Uni/IoA several months ago. The reasons we did not do Uni/IoA over Thanksgiving was specifically bc I didn't want to take my kid to a park where he would get a little sad about what he couldn't go on. He deals with that all summer at our local park.lol. At age 5 my kid did The Slingshot at Old Town. Does that make it a kiddie ride? Not in my mind, I know plenty of adults who won't do it. At 6 he now lives inverted coasters and drop towers. I have a child who is a thrill junkie and checks almost daily to see if he has reached the next "goal" yet.. 52" so he can Go on more rides at our park.

Even though both my kid and myself absolutely love thrill rides, I don't go to MK for them. We go elsewhere for that. It's why we have a WDW Platinum Pass and Cedar Fair Platinum Passes. Different experiences.

 

[KrzyKtty]

Maybe your kids grew extremely fast.lol.
But my answer is yes, for the obvious reason-Age.
Typically speaking, you're talking 4/5 year olds vs 6/7 year olds. There's a big difference between a 4 year old and a 7 year old..and now let's throw some siblings into the mix.. we're prolonging the "family" activities even farther out.

Exactly. This upcoming trip is already hard enough because we have one child who is 50" and one who is just now 40". So obviously there are a whole bunch of rides that the child who is 50" can't do without excluding at least his sister and one parent. So that means that I might no be able to see my son's reaction for his first ride on Space Mountain, or Mt. Everest, or any other larger ride. Or maybe we won't allow him to ride them at all, because we aren't going to waste a FP on a ride that not everyone can go on. And I'm fine with this, because not everyone decided to space their kids 5 years out, and every family is different.

I think Roller Coasters would be a great fit in HS. But to me, Disney World has never really been about the thrill rides. They will never be #1 in Thrill rides, if I wanted that I would go to Carowind's a mere 2.5 hours up the road. Disney is all about Family and spending that time together. Walt's entire vision was a park that a parent could enjoy with their child. Where everyone could share in the magic together.

I do agree that Tomorrowland Speedway needs to be updated. And my opinion doesn't count for much against the masses. But personally I would be sad to see one more family attraction for all disappear for a E ticket that could only be enjoyed by 7+ year olds.

 

[Daveeeeed]

Yes, 44" is the requirement for a lot of "Family Coasters" at amusement parks.

48" and up starts the "thrill" rides.


My idea of the Magic Kingdom is that the same attractions appeal to all ages. Your's is that they need to provide more variety- with more restrictions, so all ages can enjoy different attractions.
Again, to me that's the same as any other amusement park and Uni/IoA. It's not what the MK has ever been. My sister and I are almost 8 years apart, my brother 3 years apart, we all enjoyed the same rides at MK growing up.

The other Disney parks do have 48" height requirements.. only 2, and that's fine, they aren't the Magic Kingdom.

So, I'll agree to disagree.

Perhaps you and your friends have outgrown MK at the moment, that's ok. It happens to a lot of us at some point, or to some degree (maybe not spending an entire day there) and then the nostalgia brings us back.. even though we still love our thrill coasters elsewhere.

You may not realize it, but you are hilarious!

Thank you... I appreciate your replies so much I am not
Going to reply further to them!

 

[peter11435]

Maybe your kids grew extremely fast.lol.
But my answer is yes, for the obvious reason-Age.
Typically speaking, you're talking 4/5 year olds vs 6/7 year olds. There's a big difference between a 4 year old and a 7 year old..and now let's throw some siblings into the mix.. we're prolonging the "family" activities even farther out.

So it's ok to exclude 4/5 year olds from family experience but not 6/7 year olds?

 

[Buried20KLeague]

The already crowded and well loved Tokyo Disneyland and Tokyo Disney Sea are currently adding capacity and improving guest spaces. The stated goal of the expansions are primarily about improving guest experience and maximizing capacity. The realization that a total attendance of around 30 Million becoming the new normal prompted this change.

The Magic Kingdom seems like it's about to embrace a new normal that sees attendance at around 20 Million. It's by far the most critically important park in the chain, and perhaps Disney's single most important brand. I personally suspect that any new rides would be more than offset by the work done at DHS and other locations, any E Ticket will be all about increasing breathing room ahead of an anniversary that's sure to swamp the park.

As long as the Magic Kingdom is first clicking with 20 Million a year, it's going to be crowded. I doubt it can conceivably go much higher than this until the anniversary. They have to be approaching short term saturation.

They must keep pace with the rest of the industry, Magic Kingdom has perhaps the most embarrassingly poor roster quality of all Magic Kingdoms. It's old and needs refreshes and additions if it's to play in the same game as DHS, IOA, and Disneyland.

It's the crown jewel of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts. They treat it with such disregard, preferring to utilize it as a bank account to fund their many worldwide (and domestic) exploits.

They need to step up.

@Buried20KLeague I feel much the same way. I'm surprised by your experience with Tron. Was that Single Rider or standby? Usually Battle for the Sunken Treasure was significantly shorter and Tron would be longest in the park.

@21stamps Every Magic Kingdom has featured rides that could be considered not great for children. Hesitation with bringing kids on HM, PotC, and SM have always been there. I don't ever want truly awful attractions or giga coasters at a Castle Park, but there's enough room to add a more intense Everest level Coaster to the roster or a Battle for the Sunken Treasure. Either of those would be great at rounding out MK. Part of being a family park is realizing the diverse tastes of a family.

That was standby. Single rider wasn't even open.

Battle for sunken treasure averaged probably a 20 minute wait in comparison. There were times it was a walk on, and times it was 40 minutes... though when it was 40 it was largely because they cut the loading down to one side for some reason.

The only ride we got fastpass for in three days was soarin. And that was only once.

 

[21stamps]

So it's ok to exclude 4/5 year olds from family experience but not 6/7 year olds?

MK rides do not exclude the average height 4 or 5 year old. That was exactly my point.

I stress average bc I have a younger sister who is not even 5'1 at age 32.. she took awhile to meet height requirements at amusement parks.lol

 

[PorterRedkey]

You may not realize it, but you are hilarious!

Thank you... I appreciate your replies so much I am not
Going to reply further to them!

And you are being rude. Your response says more about you that it does 21Stamps.

 

[ChrisFL]

All three of those are much more upright than the vehicles in Shanghai. Frankly those all look like mostly seated positions dressed differently with restraints.

EDIT TO ADD: Notice, I said I didn't believe it would get built in the MK exactly like in Shanghai. I could see it if they changed the ride vehicles to something similar to the pics you posted.

But... I also think the whole "hook" of TRON in Shanghai IS the ride vehicles. Once you get past those, the coaster is frankly a shorter, less intense (and less fun IMO) version of Rock N Roller Coaster.

Yeah, from what I've seen it is too short of an experience and not much in the way of story in the queue?

 

[Daveeeeed]

Exactly. This upcoming trip is already hard enough because we have one child who is 50" and one who is just now 40". So obviously there are a whole bunch of rides that the child who is 50" can't do without excluding at least his sister and one parent. So that means that I might no be able to see my son's reaction for his first ride on Space Mountain, or Mt. Everest, or any other larger ride. Or maybe we won't allow him to ride them at all, because we aren't going to waste a FP on a ride that not everyone can go on. And I'm fine with this, because not everyone decided to space their kids 5 years out, and every family is different.

I think Roller Coasters would be a great fit in HS. But to me, Disney World has never really been about the thrill rides. They will never be #1 in Thrill rides, if I wanted that I would go to Carowind's a mere 2.5 hours up the road. Disney is all about Family and spending that time together. Walt's entire vision was a park that a parent could enjoy with their child. Where everyone could share in the magic together.

I do agree that Tomorrowland Speedway needs to be updated. And my opinion doesn't count for much against the masses. But personally I would be sad to see one more family attraction for all disappear for a E ticket that could only be enjoyed by 7+ year olds.

I think you are missing what I'm saying.

Thrill rides and varied attractions have a place at Disney just as much as wonderful classics like the Haunted Mansion. It's a place where families and different groups can enjoy the parks together, but people have different preferences, and many would love to have a Coaster. It will not be for everyone and there is nothing wrong with that.

To think that everything has to be catered to the very young children is not the best way to approach it -- the parks are meant to be enjoyed for everyone meaning people like different things -- coasters, dark rides, or shows. The main thing at Disney will always be non thrilling rides like it should be, but you aren't making sense when you literally said that Disney doesn't have to be #1 in thrill rides, which you and I both no is not what I am talking about. and from my understanding you are saying that thrill rides that limit anyone older than 5 have no place in the castle parks. That is absurd. Walt even believed that when you just cater to the young children there are problems -- 1 thrill ride like rock n' Rollercoaster at the Magic kingdom would be perfectly fine.



Disneyland Paris has Space a mountain: mission 2 works very well with the balanced lineup of many dark rides.

It just would be wonderful to have, and just because a 6 year old cannot ride 1 ride is not a bad thing. Disney does it in all of their newer parks.


This is coming from someone who's top ten favorite rides contain The Many Adventures of Winnie The Pooh.

 

[Daveeeeed]

So it's ok to exclude 4/5 year olds from family experience but not 6/7 year olds?

Exactly why I am puzzled.

 

[KrzyKtty]

I never said that everything has to be catered to the very young children. I said it gives me a headache to deal with it, but I get it.

I do think since Theme is important, that roller coasters just thematically work better in HS. I just can't envision a Hulk style roller coaster in MK due to the way the park is designed, but that is just my opinion. However, I didn't read anywhere where anyone said it does. That doesn't mean that thrill rides don't belong at all.

What I really said is that I would be sad to see a family attraction removed for one that is not inclusive to all.

I also don't think the other parks are great examples entirely because they are themed differently since many are single park setups. Disney World is unique in Disney in that it has 4 parks. Each one with a unique theme and purpose, so there is more room to play with in regards to what each parks is designed to reach and market to.

Mostly, I don't think that one large thrill ride will solve the crowding problem at all. Maybe two or three D levels, but not one large door stopper.

 

[Daveeeeed]

And you are being rude. Your response says more about you that it does 21Stamps.

I apologize if you are basing who I am based off of that. Maybe I went too far, but from someone who has essentially been a troll around the forums, derails threads, gets into a billion arguments, I really don't think I am the problem.