Jump to content

Wet n Wild SurfRider taken off website


Natti_amusements
 Share

Recommended Posts

Didn’t know where to put this so started a new topic.

Looks like SurfRider has been taken off the Wet n Wild website, can’t find it at all! SkyCoaster still listed as “currently closed” and FlowRider as “under maintenance” so I rlly don’t think this is an accident. Any ideas as to what could happen to SurfRider?

https://wetnwild.com.au/attractions

Edited by Natti_amusements
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get this ride out of the gold coast.

Sea World deserve better than inheriting more of WnW's leftover scraps. I get it was supposed to go there in the first place, but still. The ride's pure filler there. Knock down the castle and you've got plenty of land for a really solid flagship family attraction such as a modern flume.

I don't see any evidence of it up for sale right now, but I think surfrider would be more appreciated at a smaller park like Funfields or Aussie World. Gumbuya even if there's some capex left in the tank. Could be a solid bargain.

Edited by Baconjack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Baconjack said:

I don't see any evidence of it up for sale right now, but I think surfrider would be more appreciated at a smaller park like Funfields or Aussie World. Gumbuya even if there's some capex left in the tank. Could be a solid bargain.

Funfields - Would be good as they don't have a coaster currently

Aussie World - Would be great, but I doubt it would fit in the park

Gumbuya World - Would be seen as insuperior to TNT and PZ, I would rather them spend it on waterslides as they have enough coasters for now

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TBoy said:

I doubt it would fit in the park

It has possibly the smallest coaster footprint of practically anything out there - trust me, if Aussie World were getting it, they would most assuredly find space for it.

It's highly unlikely though. time will tell what happens to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I dont think it will go to Movie World TBH. It would be good for the park to have another coaster and it would be easy relocating it as it is less than 1km away, but would most likely be used as filler and would most likely have low ridership compared to Superman Escape and Batman Spaceshot. I'm putting my bets on a Sea World relocation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, TBoy said:

would most likely have low ridership compared to Superman Escape and Batman Spaceshot.

I’m not sure what relevance that is. If you move it to SW are you expecting it to have higher ridership than Jet Rescue or Vortex?

2 minutes ago, Gazza said:

Its on RCDB, it launches and freewheels along a track under its own momentum (eg not powered throughout)

Meh. Not a single solitary member of the public would refer to Surfrider as a rollercoaster, nor would any park in the world market one as such. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Brad2912 said:

I’m not sure what relevance that is. If you move it to SW are you expecting it to have higher ridership than Jet Rescue or Vortex?

Meh. Not a single solitary member of the public would refer to Surfrider as a rollercoaster, nor would any park in the world market one as such. 

 

I think we'll disagree on this one.

To those who think it'll end up at Movie World, sure, maybe, but I also wouldn't take something unofficial on Facebook as gospel. For what it's worth (and @joz sorry but not sorry) but its home was and should've always been at Sea World. That park is screaming for the last little bits it needs to have the perfect attraction mix, and I reckon that gets it nearly there.

  • Love it! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rumour may have come from this Jaggs video, where he does some speculation by Superman. Would Surfrider even fit in there?

 

24 minutes ago, Brad2912 said:

Meh. Not a single solitary member of the public would refer to Surfrider as a rollercoaster, nor would any park in the world market one as such. 

 

Disney refers to their RC Racers rides as Coasters. Same ride system!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Brad2912 said:

Meh. Not a single solitary member of the public would refer to Surfrider as a rollercoaster, nor would any park in the world market one as such. 

 

So was Wicked Twister a roller coaster, or Tower of Terror. They both consist of an lsm launch and then running back and forth along a track.

Why wouldn't this be too?

And yeah parks do market it as a coaster anyhow.

image.thumb.png.e1c3eb8dec250c6736b8907294c0d615.png

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a roller coaster. It satisfies the definition in every way and Intamin markets the model under the "Roller Coasters" section of their website. What the public "perceives" a ride as has nothing to do with what it actually is. It's literally a shuttle coaster, the only thing that makes it seem different to you is the unusual seating formation. If Mack Power Splashes are coasters, so is this.

Semantics out of the way though, I don't really see the difference between sending it to WBMW or to SW. My only argument for the latter is that SW still has less overall attractions, particularly in the thrill department, so this could help them spread the thrill-seeker crowd away from Vortex and Leviathan a little bit on busier days.

But honestly, if it goes to WBMW, it can't really be a bad thing. The worst thing that could happen is it doesn't draw and crowd and it's just there. The cost of moving it a few hundred metres is going to be negligible compared to building a new flat which could just as easily end up being unpopular as well. They're not going to build a coaster in Superman's helix, if anything's going there it's a flat or an ultra-compact coaster design like this, so it's not taking up space from any major projects. I say go for it. Maybe it'll reduce the other thrill rides' queues just a tiny bit during peak season.

I do wonder why SurfRider's operations were so unusually sporadic though. I got the sense they were having serious maintenance issues with it over the last few years, so that makes me think perhaps they'll scrap it. Unless it was specifically because WNW weren't equipped to maintain a coaster, I'd be curious as to why VRTP would want to keep such an unreliable ride on their roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happy to be wrong/against the grain on this one. To me it’s simply a flat ride. My personal definition, or the way I apply it, doesn’t see Surf Rider as a coaster. In saying that I also did not see Tower of Terror as a coaster despite its featured lending to that classification. I know what I think means jack all however. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ogre said:

Would Surfrider even fit in there?

Using a little bit of Google Maps 'measure distance' & crude editing, so it's far from irrefutable proof/evidence, but the actual ride envelope could only fit in there if 1 or 2 of Superman's footers are within it, but including entrance & exit lines it's nigh on impossible

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

Supposedly buzzsaw was removed for being to close to ST this would have to be even closer to SE . Maybe there is a rule . Seaworld is the only village park I can see it going to but I would much rather a modern version of Vikings revenge then this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • rappa locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 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.