Talk:Outlaw Run

Classification
Maybe I'm just out of the loop, but is there a reason this is being classified as a wooden roller coaster? I seem to recall the Texas Giant being removed from that category after it was retracked by Rocky Mountain Construction. What am I missing? Should there be a new category in the rankings for the new hybrids to keep them separate? --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:25, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * This runs on Rocky Mountain Construction's Topper Track and not the Iron Horse track. The Iron Horse track was used on Texas Giant and will be used on Iron Rattler – it is entirely steel. The Topper Track is added to a wooden track and thus it is considered a wooden roller coaster. Themeparkgc   Talk  23:03, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * But according to the Rocky Mountain Construction article, in regards to the Topper Track it says, "This steel track replaces the upper layers of laminated wood." So is Topper Track steel or wood?--Astros4477 (talk) 23:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * The topper track itself is steel but since it lays on a bed of wood, the track is still considered wood. See these RCDB links for confirmation: Outlaw Run, Texas Giant and Iron Rattler. Themeparkgc   Talk  23:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, I dug a little deeper. From the photos and descriptions I came across, it appears that a typical wooden track uses 7 layers of wood for the rails that are essentially nailed together. Steel is used to pad the contact surfaces of each rail. Topper track takes it a step further by replacing the top two layers of wood with steel that is bolted in a tight pattern to the wood frame. Because the remaining layers are still wood, the industry continues to classify them as wooden roller coasters. As for coasters using the Iron Horse track and wood supports (what I'm calling hybrids), does it make sense to create a separate classification for these? I understand Wikipedia is not the place to do so, but I wonder if any experts in the industry are considering it. --GoneIn60 (talk) 09:31, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I've seen many people use the term hybrid to describe that it is a combination; however, having a third category pretty much hasn't been covered outside of Wikipedia (see Articles for deletion/Hybrid roller coaster). RCDB does categorise hybrids (see and ) but all of these coasters are either steel or wood based on the primary track it uses.  Themeparkgc   Talk  22:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Right, I realize the amount of coverage outside of Wikipedia is scarce, and we should be careful how it is mentioned in Wiki articles. However, with Outlaw Run and the redesigned Iron Rattler right around the corner, I suspect we'll be seeing the term used a lot more in articles, newspapers, and magazines over the next couple years. This example is just the beginning. Eventually, the industry will want to have a new classification to rank steel-wood hybrids, since their capabilities (or records, if you will) are somewhat in between the top steel and top wooden coasters. --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)


 * At this stage the category of hybrids seem to have stemmed from Six Flags marketing departments. We should keep our eyes open for wider use, but it will always come down to being either primarily steel or wood track regardless of what the structure is. Themeparkgc   Talk  00:03, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

You have to ask yourself, "Why do we separate roller coasters into two classifications, wood and steel, in order to rank height, length, and speed?". The answer may not be so simple. Obviously, the capabilities of a wooden track differ from that of a steel track. All ranking categories would be dominated by steel. So at some historical point in time, the separation into two classifications was desired, probably more so by a marketing department at some amusement park. Who wouldn't want to lay claim to the tallest or fastest wooden coaster and disregard the fact that many steel coasters would still dwarf its statistics. So, while I agree that we "should keep our eyes open for wider use", I think it's important to point out that the motivation behind separating the track into two classifications might not be so different than the motivation behind creating a new hybrid classification. The track is what we go by now, but who's to say that it will always be the only factor for ranking and classification? No response needed (though still welcome)...just thought I'd lend some food for thought! --GoneIn60 (talk) 11:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Outlaw Run. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.silverdollarcity2013.com/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://silverdollarcity2013.com/thanks.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://sdctripplanning.com/clues/clue1.php
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://sdctripplanning.com/clues/clue2.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111206231428/http://coaster-net.com/blogs/160-rocky-mountain-construction-company/ to http://www.coaster-net.com/blogs/160-rocky-mountain-construction-company/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130901054320/http://content.sixflags.com/comingin2014/ to http://content.sixflags.com/comingin2014/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131019223439/http://www.goldenticketawards.com/pdfs/2013_golden_ticket_section.pdf to http://www.goldenticketawards.com/pdfs/2013_golden_ticket_section.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131019223439/http://www.goldenticketawards.com/pdfs/2013_golden_ticket_section.pdf to http://www.goldenticketawards.com/pdfs/2013_golden_ticket_section.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)