gringotts ride for heavy people

[goddesserika18]

Hi my boyfriend is 400 lbs and 5'5 do u think he could fit on gringotts ride.

 

[johde]

You never know for sure until you try the test seat but I highly doubt it. I'm 6'4" tall about 325 and I comfortably fit Gringotts in the back row. The Ride OP needed to give 1 easy extra click that I probably could have done myself had I known I needed it.

 

[disneylove69]

Im 5-5 and weigh less and the answer is "no"

 

[bumbershoot]

I say no too. DH is taller and lighter and he was a NO.

 

[Minerva Mouse]

I'm going to say no as well. I'm 5'4" and while I won'd disclose my actual weight, I will say its less. I can ride Dragons, but only in the modified seat, and I barely, just barely, squeeze into Gringotts. I typically could ride the Forbidden Journey, however the last time we went, the female ride attendant said "it wasn't safe for me to ride". Maybe I've gained some more weight, or maybe she didn't have the strength, but Universal isn't as Pooh friendly as Disney. I'm going to say that the Mummy is probably a no too, as I just barely squeeze into that one as well. Rip Ride Rocket is also going to be a no, it is the least Pooh friendly of all the rides, it's not one I can sometimes squeeze into, its a for sure no way, no how.

 

[disneylove69]

Universal is movie based and like their customers just as thin as their movie stars

 

[chabs]

It really depends on where the weight is carried. We were just there a couple of weeks ago and there was a very large couple in front of us in line (350-375 pounds each at least-we're bigger people so I am a pretty good judge at guessing weight). I was thinking there was no way either one of them was going to fit but they did. We were all in the back row. They carried their weight width-wise across the hips-not in front of them. The problem is if you carry weight where the lap bar would go-which is low across your lap. A big belly gets in the way and doesn't let the lap bar click down as far as it needs to go.

 

[snoopboop]

Universal is movie based and like their customers just as thin as their movie stars

The rider specifications are set by the ride manufacturers and are intended to ensure guest safety on the rides. Nothing more to it than that.

 

[nkereina]

Universal is movie based and like their customers just as thin as their movie stars

LOL I hope you're joking. Universal has many more intense thrill rides than WDW does. Therefore, the restraints are much more intense and restrictive too.

I do agree with PP in that it depends on where the weight is carried. I'm only about 30lbs overweight and have larger thighs than anywhere else, and felt Gringotts to be tight on my legs (Mine Train too, for comparison).

 

[schumigirl]

Universal is movie based and like their customers just as thin as their movie stars

Not true.

 

[wellesleyprincess]

Universal is movie based and like their customers just as thin as their movie stars

That comment seems uncalled for and rude.
Universal is no worse than any other theme park and has worked to be more accommodating (adding special seats, etc.).

That being said OP, no I don't think your boyfriend will fit on Gringotts and I'm guessing with those dimension he may have issues with other harness rides and many rides other rides at Universal, Disney, and other theme parks.

 

[johde]

The rider specifications are set by the ride manufacturers and are intended to ensure guest safety on the rides. Nothing more to it than that.

You could add, in general, Disney has gone with manufacturers that are able to build rides that are more accommodating to larger riders. Universal has tended to go with more thrilling rides from manufacturers that have smaller restraints. That being said. Universal has worked with several of the manufacturers to be able to come up with modified seating for larger guests. From the earliest days of IOA, Hulk and Dueling Dragon (now Dragon Challenge) have had modified Seats that allow certain larger riders to ride. Raptor at Cedar Point and most if not all of the Batman: The Ride coasters at Six Flags that were build prior to Dueling Dragons Still haven't been retrofitted with "Big Boy" Seats. When Forbidden Journey had troubles with larger riders fitting, the worked with the manufacturer on modifying the outside seats of each Bench to be able to handle larger guests. I don't have any personal experience with it. But I've heard the Handicapped Accessible boat on Dudley Do Right has a back seat (The one that raises for wheel chair riders to ride) can fit almost anyone. Disney is the Gold Standard for Pooh friendly attractions but Universal does better than most in this area.

Universal is movie based and like their customers just as thin as their movie stars

It's nice to know somebody thinks I'm movie star thin.

 

[ladybugx]

Theme parks can only do so much. It is not realistic to expect parks to create seats on thrill rides that accommodate people who are three and four times the size of the average person their height. In many cases, such seats would place smaller guests at risk of falling out of rides, and there aren't enough guests that size for it to make financial sense to build one or two seats that can fit someone of that size. The reality is that there aren't that many people who weigh 400 lbs who are also thrill ride seekers. Disney isn't a fair comparison at all. A lot of the rides at Disney glide leisurely along a track.

 

[bumbershoot]

That being said. Universal has worked with several of the manufacturers to be able to come up with modified seating for larger guests. From the earliest days of IOA, Hulk and Dueling Dragon (now Dragon Challenge) have had modified Seats that allow certain larger riders to ride. Raptor at Cedar Point and most if not all of the Batman: The Ride coasters at Six Flags that were build prior to Dueling Dragons Still haven't been retrofitted with "Big Boy" Seats. When Forbidden Journey had troubles with larger riders fitting, the worked with the manufacturer on modifying the outside seats of each Bench to be able to handle larger guests. I don't have any personal experience with it. But I've heard the Handicapped Accessible boat on Dudley Do Right has a back seat (The one that raises for wheel chair riders to ride) can fit almost anyone.

But the OP's boyfriend is not going to be one of the people those modifications are going to work for. He's 5-6" shorter than DH and heavier. There's just no way I can see it happening.

Not even sure about Dudley. DH did go on that, in that back seat. I think that "almost anyone" is a bit of an overstatement. He was in it, he did manage to get out of it, but it wasn't pleasant or pretty for him.

Theme parks can only do so much. It is not realistic to expect parks to create seats on thrill rides that accommodate people who are three and four times the size of the average person their height. In many cases, such seats would place smaller guests at risk of falling out of rides, and there aren't enough guests that size for it to make financial sense to build one or two seats that can fit someone of that size. The reality is that there aren't that many people who weigh 400 lbs who are also thrill ride seekers. Disney isn't a fair comparison at all. A lot of the rides at Disney glide leisurely along a track.

Gringott's is HARDLY a thrill ride. Spin and smash you to the right, look at a screen. Go down a little bump of a hill, spin and smash you to the left, look at a screen. Wash rinse repeat. I couldn't find the thrills in it at all, unless wondering when your ribs will actually break from the side-smashing counts.

Just like with Mine Train (I am a shorter size 6 and felt smooshed in that thing), they could EASILY have found a different way of making the restraints so it wasn't so restrictive. There is nothing thrilling about either one of those rides, so the biggest issue is someone wanting to get out before they are bored to death, and for that issue, simple locking seatbelts like on Grizzly/Kali, Star Tours, TOT, etc, have worked JUST fine.

(nope, didn't like Gringott's at all, which was incredibly disappointing to me. But it made me feel better that DH cannot yet ride it. And might never; even once he loses what people would see as his weight, he will always have glorious tree trunk legs and those legs will likely always keep him from Gringott's and The Mummy.


Impossible to prove the assertion that there are few big people who are thrill ride seekers, since none of them fit them. Make some rides that fit the people on the high end, and then you'll see how many people show up to ride them. DH would be first in line.

 

[johde]

The reality is that there aren't that many people who weigh 400 lbs who are also thrill ride seekers. Disney isn't a fair comparison at all. A lot of the rides at Disney glide leisurely along a track.

At my heaviest, I weighted nearly 400lbs. I'm also tall so I know that also makes a difference. But, I could still easily ride, Rock 'n' Roller Coaster, Dinosaur, Test Track, Expedition Everest, Star Tours, Mission Space, Space Mountain (this was at least 1 train reconfiguration ago). When I was at my heaviest, one of the things I liked about Disney was that all of the thrill rides there are still available to me. At Universal, I couldn't Ride Hulk, or Dueling Dragon and could just barely ride Revenge of the Mummy (This was in the pre HP and HRRR days). I could also just barely ride Dudley Do Right (Pre-Lap Bar days).

Like I mentioned in a previous post, I can currently ride everything at Universal (although Forbidden Journey takes some maneuvering). I'm probably a good 40+ lbs away from being able to ride Top Thrill Dragster or Millennium Force at Cedar Point here in Ohio one of my local theme parks.

 

[ladybugx]

Yes, there are always exceptions, and yes height plays a huge role in body dimensions, as do other factors such as muscle mass. Most people who weigh 400+ lbs are not just simply very tall or very muscular, though. But outliers exist. And yes, Gringotts isn't much of a thrill ride, but the comment about Universal wanting its guests to be movie star thin was directed at Universal in general. I've seen threads where people complained just as much about the seating on rides like Hulk, which are thrill rides and do require that the engineers that design them devise restraints that are impossible to fall out of. I don't think it's reasonable to expect engineers to cater to virtually everyone. Wishing they would or requesting they do is one thing, but the attitude some people have that Universal and its ride makers are no-good-evil discriminatory jerks baffles me.

 

[snoopboop]

they could EASILY have found a different way of making the restraints so it wasn't so restrictive. There is nothing thrilling about either one of those rides, so the biggest issue is someone wanting to get out before they are bored to death, and for that issue, simple locking seatbelts like on Grizzly/Kali, Star Tours, TOT, etc, have worked JUST fine.

Unless you're an engineer working in the design of thrill rides, I don't know how you can assert that they could "easily have found a different way." My eight-year-old is SO excited to meet the height requirements to ride some more exciting coasters, and I'm very bothered by the assertion that the safety restraints on thrill rides should be modified to accommodate larger riders, at the possible expense of making it LESS safe for those at the bottom end of the height spectrum to ride. As other posters have stated, the restraints are designed to keep riders safely in the ride vehicle. There is an upper limit to the body size that will fit in each restraint, and as rides get more and more intense, the restraints need to be more secure/restrictive. Just because a ride doesn't "seem" thrilling to you doesn't mean that there aren't specific forces being applied to the body that require a certain type of restraint to ensure that riders stay safely secured in the ride vehicle.

 

[ladybugx]

It is very true that how thrilling a ride feels isn't a very reliable indicator of the extent and types of forces being exerted on riders. I once read that plopping down into a chair places the body under greater g-forces than most roller coasters, but it's obvious which feels more thrilling. The physical world is complicated, and engineers understand it far better than laypersons do. I value safety above all else. There have been several examples in the news of what happens when someone goes on a ride when his or her body dimensions are outside of what the ride can safely accommodate. Engineers can make accommodations to a certain extent, as we've seen with modified seating, but it is unrealistic to think they could accommodate EVERY body type on EVERY ride.

 

[eeyoreandtink]

Unless you're an engineer working in the design of thrill rides, I don't know how you can assert that they could "easily have found a different way." My eight-year-old is SO excited to meet the height requirements to ride some more exciting coasters, and I'm very bothered by the assertion that the safety restraints on thrill rides should be modified to accommodate larger riders, at the possible expense of making it LESS safe for those at the bottom end of the height spectrum to ride. As other posters have stated, the restraints are designed to keep riders safely in the ride vehicle. There is an upper limit to the body size that will fit in each restraint, and as rides get more and more intense, the restraints need to be more secure/restrictive. Just because a ride doesn't "seem" thrilling to you doesn't mean that there aren't specific forces being applied to the body that require a certain type of restraint to ensure that riders stay safely secured in the ride vehicle.

Because Disney does it, and on rides that involve MUCH more force/ risk. They could have made both Gringotts and Forbidden Journey much more comfortable, they chose not to because it wasn't a priority.

 

[gofordrew]

my boyfriend is 400 lbs and 5'5

Good lord.