why does disney have such small height restrictions?
I've noticed that Disney has it better when it comes to height restrictions. To prove my point, I'll point out similar attractions from Disney and Universal that have height limit.
Example 1: TOT: 40", but could easily rise to 44" or even 48". Dr. Doom; 52".
Example 2: Kali River Rapids; which has a 30 foot drop gets 38". Popeye and Bluto; 42" but the biggest drop is probably 18-22 ft.
Example 3: Expedition Everest is 44" but goes down a backwards drop 80 ft in the dark. Revenge of the Mummy; 48" but the biggest drop is 25 ft; it's just the launch that makes the drops big.
Example 4: RNRC; 48" but it goes 60 mph in launch and in the dark and upside down 3 times. Hulk launches at 40 mph and goes upside down only 4 times more but gets a 54" height limit.
Example 5: Buzz Lightyear shoot em' up gets no height limit. MIB which is quite similar and only has a few spins and a "scary" ending gets a 42".
The only Universal ride I'd argue needs a bigger height limit is Dudley Do Right which deserves a 52" height limit. Also if Universal made a ride like Test Track; it would get 46". And Mission: Space... totally 51".
Are height limits biased to Disney? You decide.
Universal Studios is a theme park that thrives on teenagers and adults for business. Disney on the otherhand is a family park that thrives on younger riders, especially families with children. Disney rides are given vigorous testing, and are given safety harnesses that fit a wide variety of sizes from extra small to extra extra large. Disney also happens to be one of the best parks for plus sized people who can fit on just about every ride with the exception of one or two and even then they are not restricted from riding, but it’s a comfort thing. Disney went above and beyond when it came to ride testing, ride construction, and safety harness construction to make sure that their rides were safe for everyone, not just a select age group. Disney has one of the best safety records in the world when it comes to amusement parks, so they are obviously doing something right!
Probably because the restraints are safe to hold smaller people, lots of kids come there which means more money for them!
Height limits are set by the parks themselves, not any government agency. It’s based on many factors, most important is insurance policies. For cheaper rates, some parks set higher height limits. Disney is a park for families, so they swallow the financial pill, and pay the higher insurance costs to get the lower restrictions.
This policy makes it much more fun for smaller children, and creates a loyal repeat customer base. They also charge a lot more at the gate, too.
they gota have them
The Height Requirement is set by the Ride Manufacturer, the parks, and the State. It has to do with the safety restraints and the "forces" that would be exerted on the body.
You would have to get into the true technical specifications of the ride to see if there are really any differences requiring different height requirements. What is really interesting is that at least in the State of CA requires this type of testing on every attraction. It is interesting to see them test this on rides such as Small World that have little or no forces acting on them.
By the way no park is going to "eat it" in terms of insurance. If the ride is not safe for a particular height, then they are not going to allow that person to ride. No park wants an injury or death on their record because they wanted to allow more people to experience a ride.
cuz disneyland rides are geared towards families and children.