I am sure the folks at Disneyland have their reasons behind each and every height requirement...so this isn't really a complaint at all...just an observation. But it seems like some of the height requirements don't make a ton of sense. My daughter is 3 and sitting at 39 inches. She could easily have a growth spurt and be 40 inches soon, or hold for quite awhile. A lot of her friends (her same age) are already 40 inches. But NO WAY would I take her on Space Mountian anytime soon, even if she were an inch taller. And yet, riding other rides - like Soarin' Over CA & Splash Mountain to name a few...I was thinking she's definately ready for those. Same w/ Grizzly River Rapids. I think it's height requirement is 42 or maybe even higher? I'm not sure why...

They're not just about the developmental abilities of the child but about the size of the vehicle and the safety restraints they use on the vehicle.

Splash and Soarin' are both 40", same as Space & Thunder.

Adrienne

My son hit 40" before his 3rd Birthday. The only 40" ride I was comfortable taking him on at that time was Soarin' Over California. If he were more of a daredevil, I may have pondered the others, but I know him and spared him the big rides. When he is ready to tackle the coasters I'll take him, until then it's just best to know your childs limitations and go with your instincts. I'm sure he would be "safe" on rides he's tall enough for, but that doesn't mean he'd like them or be ready for them.

When we went last year we took my daughter and my niece who are 6 weeks apart. My daughter was 42 and my niece was 41 and not able to do a few rides. When we asked a CM why most rides were 40 and just a few were 42, we were told that the rides created by disney, disney can set thier own height requirements, usually 40. If the ride is created by someone else the manufacturer creates thier own height requirements, bringing the few odd ball 42 into the picture. I don't know if this is the truth, but that is what we were told and it made a little more sense.

When we asked a CM why most rides were 40 and just a few were 42, we were told that the rides created by disney, disney can set thier own height requirements, usually 40. If the ride is created by someone else the manufacturer creates thier own height requirements, bringing the few odd ball 42 into the picture. I don't know if this is the truth, but that is what we were told and it made a little more sense.

I suspect that this is a case of a CM not knowing the answer to your question and making up a response (or guessing somewhat wildly). The height restrictions are set case-by-case based on the nature and design of the ride. They reflect what size a child needs to be to safely fit in the safety restraints. It is very doubtful that those restrictions have anything at all to do with who manufactured a ride.

Contrary to the complaints some have thrown around recently about "off-the-shelf" rides, there really are very few that could accurately fit that description at any Disney parks. There are a number of rides at the various parks that are built by outside companies (in fact, the vast majority are, including many of the older rides), but they are custom built to Disney's exact specifications. Ultimately, Disney has control over the design decisions that lead to various restrictions, regardless of who builds the ride.

-Jeff

My 41" son (3 years old) has been on Jumpin' Jellyfish, Splash, Soarin', Gadget's, Matterhorn and Thunder. He wanted to go on Mulholland Madness but was too short, by an inch, in March, I am assuming he will be 42" in November when we go back, but not sure if I will be ready for him to go on Mulholland, it scares ME! IF he is 42" when we go this fall he will be able to go on Space and IS now tall enough to go on Star Tours. While I think he would enjoy Star Tours, it jerks around too much for him, I think. And NO WAY would I take him on Space. He LOVES Thunder, Gadget's, Soarin', and Jumpin' Jellyfish. Just talking to him the other day, he thinks he might want to try Splash again, but doesn;t want to go on Matterhorn until he is "older."
I think the height is strictly what the ride manufacturers have decided is the shortest an occupant can be to be safely restrained in the ride. It has NOTHING to do with maturity of the rider.

I think the height is strictly what the ride manufacturers have decided is the shortest an occupant can be to be safely restrained in the ride. It has NOTHING to do with maturity of the rider.[/QUOTE]


I totally agree with you!!! I think that is our responsiblity as parents to judge if our children are mature enough for a ride or not. Just like I also believe it is Disney's responsibility to say how tall a child should be to ride a ride safely.

I think that is our responsiblity as parents to judge if our children are mature enough for a ride or not. Just like I also believe it is Disney's responsibility to say how tall a child should be to ride a ride safely.

I totally agree w/ that, too. I guess it just amazes me that rides like Soarin' and Jumpin' Jellyfish have the same requirement as Space Mountain, which seems so much more - jolting, thrilling, etc.

the only thing that baffles me is Matterhorn at 35" seems lenient. It's much rougher on a human body than Soarin' or Grizzly are. I'd put all three of these at 38" .

--- not an ergonomist nor a kinesiologist - i just play one on the web.

I think the issue with both Soaring and JJ is that a small child might slip down under the seat belt and/or lean forward in their excitement. It's more aof a maturity issue, and at 40" maybe they thought most kids would be mature enough to stay back in their seats?

My 41" son (3 years old) has been on Jumpin' Jellyfish, Splash, Soarin', Gadget's, Matterhorn and Thunder. He wanted to go on Mulholland Madness but was too short, by an inch, in March, I am assuming he will be 42" in November when we go back, but not sure if I will be ready for him to go on Mulholland, it scares ME! IF he is 42" when we go this fall he will be able to go on Space and IS now tall enough to go on Star Tours. While I think he would enjoy Star Tours, it jerks around too much for him, I think. And NO WAY would I take him on Space. He LOVES Thunder, Gadget's, Soarin', and Jumpin' Jellyfish. Just talking to him the other day, he thinks he might want to try Splash again, but doesn;t want to go on Matterhorn until he is "older."
I think the height is strictly what the ride manufacturers have decided is the shortest an occupant can be to be safely restrained in the ride. It has NOTHING to do with maturity of the rider.
My daughter is now 42 And We went on Mulholland. They have this big tube thing that they put on her bar so that she is snuggly tight in the seat. THat made me feel much more comfortable. I would not take her on slash with the new seats because I would feel like I do not have controll of her and could not hold her. She loves Gadget and Jelly Fish!