Corkscrew vs Millennium Force
card comparison
| Stat | Corkscrew | Millennium Force | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 85 ft | 310 ft | |
| Speed | 48 mph | 93 mph | |
| Inversions | 3 | 0 | |
| Throughputest. | 1800 rph | 1300 rph | |
| Build Costest. | 1.8 $m | 25 $m | |
| Vintage | 1976 | 2000 |
Vintage is the reversed stat — the older ride wins. Every number here is the same one printed on the card; see /methodology for how Build Cost and Throughput are sourced.
The verdict
Honours end even at 3–3, which is the awkward kind of matchup: whoever calls the stat decides the round.
Corkscrew is a steel Corkscrew with vertical loop coaster at Cedar Point, US, built by Arrow Development. Millennium Force is a steel Giga Coaster coaster at Cedar Point, US, built by Intamin.
Both live at Cedar Point, so this is a comparison you can settle on foot in an afternoon — and one the park itself has to answer every time someone asks which to queue for first.
Both are steel-track, so nothing here is the usual steel-versus-wood argument in disguise.
Stat by stat
- Height goes to Millennium Force at 310 ft against 85 ft — in another class entirely.
- Speed goes to Millennium Force at 93 mph against 48 mph — nearly double.
- Corkscrew inverts 3 times against nothing at all from Millennium Force — the widest kind of gap there is on this stat.
- Throughput goes to Corkscrew at 1,800 rph against 1,300 rph — a long way clear.
- Build Cost goes to Millennium Force at 25 $m against 1.8 $m — in another class entirely.
- 24 years separate them, and because Vintage rewards age it is Corkscrew (1976) that banks the point, not Millennium Force (2000).