Radiator spring racers 48 inch height requirment-Verified to 40"

[DLR29]

Not being able to ride something on a particular trip to DL may not be a big thing to pass holders or folks who can go to DL often, or even every year.
But many families have to save for a long time for a trip to DL; and if a child can't ride this time, they have to wait for several years. So it's sad for them.
And to be honest, at the prices charged, I want my grandkids to be able to do as much as possible.
They will understand not being able to ride Screamin' because it's a roller coaster and they know that coasters are for big kids and adults.
But something from Cars? That will be harder to explain. JMHO.

Yes. It's called patience. I was a short kid growing up. I was an amusement park fanatic before a Disney fanatic. I didn't hit 54" until 5th grade (and that's the golden height at a lot of amusement parks to ride some of the big roller coasters). But I understood that it was a height thing and that I would someday get to ride the bigger rides. Kids do understand these things. I waited. Was I sad? Probably. I got over it.

Also I think explaining that a kid can't ride RSR is just as easy to explain as Screamin. You just tell them that RSR is also for big kids and adults, and you move on.

 

[nannyz]

Your posts make a lot of sense. And you're right -- my attitude will affect my grandson's reaction. Thanks!!

 

[BuzzBiteyear]

Has the 48" been confirmed? As previously it was stated by Disney PR that this would be a 40" ride. Seems odd that a ride based on CARS would be 48". At this point, that would put it with only California Screamin' as 48" requirement rides.

 

[Malcon10t]

Has the 48" been confirmed? As previously it was stated by Disney PR that this would be a 40" ride. Seems odd that a ride based on CARS would be 48". At this point, that would put it with only California Screamin' as 48" requirement rides.

No, it has not been confirmed. Disney PR stated 40" 2 years ago, before the ride was built. I personally don't expect it to be 48", but I wouldn't be surprised with 46" like Indy.

 

[Angel Ariel]

I don't begrudge someone who is disappointed, but some of the posts seem to be expressing anger and even that it is just downright wrong for Disney to have created a ride like RSR with a height restriction.

Most of us here are parents and we all were children once (or still children today). We all know what it is like to be disappointed and it breaks my heart, if even just a little, to watch one of my kids be disappointed ... especially if I feel that it was caused by misinformation (as is implied here). But at the end of the day, dealing with disappointment is a part of life and we need to be careful how we react as adults. Kids will feed off of our reaction (both good and bad).

Amen! Especially to the bolded part.

I totally get being disappointed, but I don't get the viewpoint that everything "Cars" should be geared toward small children.

Personally, I don't like this trend of Disney's to base entire lands off of one movie - but if they're going to do it, they absolutely should be planning something that appeals to a broader demographic. There's a huge middle ground between dark rides and 6-Flags type roller coasters - RSR is definitely in that middle ground.

 

[DISHoppy]

OK, I'll say my piece and be done with this...

I called last week and was told by CM Mary that the height requirement for Racers would be 48", and when I asked when something official would be announced, she stated maybe this Wed. The OP indicated that a man state 48" as well. Unless There's Something About Mary we do know, that's two separate CMs with this information, which is disconcerting for soon-to-be guests like myself and my family. These folks may be remote, etc., but they use scripts for their communication. I interact with people who run VERY large call centers on a daily basis, so I am very familiar with how they operate, and in fact worked in one many years ago before they referred to them as call centers.

The OC Register printed/posted 42" as the height requirement. They did not come up with this number randomly. Yes, mistakes happen, but we have another example from the DP Blog indicating it will be shorter than 48".

In short, Di$ney's, and specifically DLR's, corp communications is horrid. There are WAY too many examples of VERY poor communications coming from them either from the DL site, DP Blog or direct from CMs over the past couple of months. I come to this conclusion after seeing inconsistent information posted on the DLR and DP Web sites, and speaking with numerous reps directly. The amount of inconsistent and down right erroneous information being officially spewed by DI$ is simply mind boggling. It is unfathomable that this type of information is being fed to us in the manner that it is. Especially considering how tightly any and all information about Cars Land, BVS and the DCA re-opening is being controlled by the highest management @ DI$ and DLR. In fact, Lasseter has been reported by many sources to be directly involved with the most minute aspects of the DCA re-opening, and especially Cars Land.

Now, my own personal opinion is that a 48" height requirement would just be silly. There's a reason why rides like RnRC and Primevil Whirl @ WDW have higher requirements due to spinning or inversions. I get that. But when rides like TT, BTMRR, Splash, Space don't have the same requirement, then something is wrong with the standards being used. Heck, Splash @ WDW didn't even have lap bars until the major refurb over a year ago. Now none of us know exactly how Racers will be, but I think we know enough to compare it to other rides to make a solid educated guess. It seems to me that Racers being more extreme than any of the rides I listed with <48" height requirements seems a bit far fetched.

That's my $.02. YMMV.

Peace out.

-Kevin

 

[cgh]

As the mom of a boy who may miss the cutoff, and who I erroneously told he might be able to ride, I too am a bit surprised with the anger and belief that this will ruin the trip. I remember when I was little and didn't meet the ride limits and I don't remember that ruining my trip-I was at Disney and there's tons to ride and do. (and really, some of those rides, such as Space Mountain, I just was a bit scared to do when I was 5).

When recently DS wanted to get measured to see if he was tall enough (when he was also pretty sick at the doctor, hadn't slept or eaten, etc.) I told him that the height limit might be different and he still might not ride. I immediately added that he'll be able to ride the tires, and he didn't have a tantrum or get upset. There's a lot of other stuff to see and do. He'll be over the moon regardless.

As for the 'entitlement' issue-I can understand that a child would be disappointed particularly if everyone else in his/her group could ride. Who wants to be left out? But with that, I do think that the parents/caregivers etc. influence attitude. If you tell your child that it isn't fair, mean, cruel etc. to have a different height instead of focusing on the positive of what a child could do then I can guess how the child would act. Kids can surprise you too-so give them some credit.

 

[mytymom79]

Just my 2 cents here.....

Yes, I have 2 boys 14 and 6. Unfortunately my 6 year old is just 42" today. He rode test track last year at WDW and BTMRR but was too short for space mountain .

He is a roller coaster freak, we must have went on test track and BTMRR 50 times while there last February. He even did the Tower of Terror when his older brother was too chicken.

The only reason why we are heading to Disneyland in California ( we are Canadians and Orlando is only 3 hour flight and cheap) is because of CARSLAND.

However, I know that my attitude reflects on my children so I will not show dissapointment but instead keep my fingers crossed he hits a growth spurt before November or that there is a with adult height lower. Considering he has only grew 2 inches since February 2011.

However, I will still get to ride with my oldest just will have to convince my parents to keep the youngest occupied. And by the looks of carsland I am sure we can get over it. He understands somewhat that it is safety.

Between this and Indiana Jones and California Screaming I am sure he will settle if we sweet talk him with a new car or a different ride while we are on them.

His favorite show was Indiana Jones at WDW and we watched it 2 or 3 times each day we where in Hollywood studios. But I was looking at the maps and we might be able to sneak him by to something else while me and his big brother sneak on it....

Either way there is no need to get our panties in a bunch. Really...its just a ride and Disney is only doing there job... SAFETY 1ST

Is it bad that I still want to go on the ride even though my youngest cant ? LOL

 

[dnamertz]

dnamertz -

I just wanted to let you know that I agree with you about Cars Land. If the fans had been polled (including myself) and asked if they wanted a whole land devoted to "Cars," I would have voted against it for sure. I didn't understand the choice. I was very disinterested in the idea when we all first learned of the plans for DCA. "Cars" is not my favorite Pixar movie at all - not by a long shot - while the "Toy Story" movies are not only my favorites of the Pixar bunch but are also among my favorite movies, period. (I could watch "Toy Story 3" over and over.) Not only that but I think there are other Pixar movies whose themes could lend themselves to some really fun lands (i.e., a Monster-themed land, a superhero land, etc.).

Plus, there are limitations with the "Cars" characters in the park - for example, you can pose with them in DCA, but they can't hug you or put their arms around you for a photo. You kind of just have to stand there and figure out how to pose with a car.

But...all of that said, I totally understand what HydroGuy is saying about why Cars Land was the obvious choice. Once the whole 'California' theme was set up for DCA, Disney kind of boxed itself in and now has to put in attractions that somehow - however remotely - fit that theme, unless they were to decide to scrap the whole California theme altogether and go with a different one. So with "Cars," they can make that California connection.

The other thing is that Disneyland park is very Princess-centric. Great for little girls; not so much for little boys. Cars Land will give the boys something to rival the Princesses.

Do I think the Little Mermaid ride would work better in Disneyland, and that the Nemo Subs would be better in California Adventure? Of course I do! But I don't think it was possible to do it that way, for whatever reason.

So, at this point, because Cars Land is coming, whether I like it or not, I am trying to build excitement for myself about it. It is a brand new land, after all. I remember how exciting it was when Toon Town opened back in 1993! I am trying to tap into that 'new land excitement' and look forward to what I hope will be a cornucopia of new, clever Disney details and fun things to take photos of! Also, there have been rumors (only rumors) that Cars Land will get its own special holiday decorations in November. I am all about the holidays at DLR (especially the theme-specific holiday decorations in different lands), so if there is any truth to this I will be very pleased!

Let me just clarify that even though I was not a fan of the Cars movies, I am still interested and excited about the new land and the rides in it. I do agree that it is a good fit with the whole California theme of the park, and it will be loved by kids...and Disney usually knows what they are doing. I'm looking forward to it, even if it the movies were'nt some of my favorites.

 

[3Minnies1Mickey]

Last fall I went to WDW and Universal Orlando with 1 child that was 1/2" from being 40" and another that was 1/2" from 48" (min for most rides at US). Was it disappointing? Yes. Did it ruin our trip? Not in the least. There's always next time (even if "next time" is several years away like it was with us and Orlando). I definitely think the parent's attitude can make or break these situations. The other rides in Carsland have a very low height minimum (my youngest would've met them at 1 year). I doubt RSR will have a 48" minimum, would not be surprised if it was 42-44".

 

[perlster]

How about this? Margaret1976 found a page on the mobile Disney site, and ...

 

[mrswh]

As several posters already mentioned, there are MANY kids who are at 48 inches as young as 5 years old.

I agree that it is just plain strange to be angry with Disney for making a ride with a 48" inch height requirement (if that's even the case), but I do understand those who will be disappointed. I imagine for most it won't be the end of the world - if it will ruin the whole trip I guess those people should just reschedule for a later date when their children are tall enough to ride.

But - least be realistic - a 48" 5 year old would be (literally) off the charts tall. There are very few 5 year olds that are 48" tall. Even at age 6, being 48" tall would put a kid in the 89th percentile for height. The average child does not hit 48" until about 7 years. For kids who are below average height, they may be 8 or 9 years old before they get to 48".

There are many 3-6 year olds that are crazy over Cars. I'm not saying that means all the rides in Carsland need to be kiddie rides (I think that RSR looks awesome and I am glad they are building that and not another kiddie ride in CL), but there will be a large contingent of Cars fans that will be turned away with a 48" requirement. My son is 6 and will be part of that. I am sure he would be disappointed, and it would be hard to see him have to miss out. Does that mean Disney is mean and horrible? Um, no. But I can still hope that the height requirement is low enough that he can ride!

So there, after I remarked to myself, "seriously? This thread is still going?" I went ahead and added to it.

 

[I'm mikey]

Now posted on Disneyland website, Radiatore Springs Racers....40 inch height requirment.

Radiatore Springs Racers height requirments

 

[TheZue]

Yay I wasn't going to have a hissy fit, but it definitely would have put a damper on our trip. We could have gone earlier, we decided to wait until the fall when Carsland would be open. Our four year old is really really excited; and 41 inches tall. I know they aren't only doing this for little kids, but they market Cars at toddlers like CRAZY. He had Cars pullups, they constantly showed the Mater's Tall Tales shorts on Disney Junior, has a Cars toddler bed, and has a bunch of Cars board books. It is the big Disney property for little boys and I'm really happy they made it accessible for the preschoolers; but really they had to know who they were attracting with this...Honestly had it been just DH and I or if we had girls we probably would have avoided the craziness and gone earlier this year.

 

[strikrr]

...But - least be realistic - a 48" 5 year old would be (literally) off the charts tall. There are very few 5 year olds that are 48" tall. Even at age 6, being 48" tall would put a kid in the 89th percentile for height. The average child does not hit 48" until about 7 years. For kids who are below average height, they may be 8 or 9 years old before they get to 48".

This made me laugh...my son would be the major exception. He turns 5 today and measures 47 1/4".

 

[luckyman_apd]

But I called some guy who used to be the roommate of a cousin of a Disney Cast member, and he said that the height requirement of the coolest new ride being built would be 50". Most kids who are freakishly tall for their age will be able to ride it, but for the rest of you, you are S.O.L. There are numerous reports and websites that state otherwise, but I'm gonna post this anyway and we can debate it for 7 pages because I swear, this guy I talked to knows.




It's been posted on here for a while that 40" is the requirement. It was stated in several of the presentations long ago. Granted things could change during construction and test runs, but seeing that this attraction is based off of test track at Epcot, I don't know why anyone would believe anything other than 40" or something very close to 40". Test track is 40".

 

[perlster]

Will these second and third listings on the official Disney site finally bring down the curtains on this melodrama?

[still confusion on the Matterhorn Boblsleds - was the required height really updated?]

Yes, at the last moment, Cars Land has been relocated to Disneyland Park.

 

[Disney Dreams]

Almost 100 posts of fretting and almost fighting over what turns out to be a none issue. Patience truly is a virtue.

- Dreams

 

[mrswh]

Will these second and third listings on the official Disney site finally bring down the curtains on this melodrama?

Yes, at the last moment, Cars Land has been relocated to Disneyland Park.

You see why you can never believe anything Disney says??

 

[Margaret1976]

Its crazy because these numbers were reported months ago. Then somewhere along the line all these different rumors start. I guess Al Lutz was correct about Matterhorn even though he never responded to my email from 2 weeks ago.