Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Which Is The Fastest Sports Car In The World?  
User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9106 posts, RR: 15
Posted (12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3021 times:

Which is the fastest sports car in the world? At one point it was Jaguar XJ220 but that was quite some time ago

50 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 6900 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (12 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2991 times:

Bugatti Veyron SS and Hennessey Venom GT. The latest Koenigsegg Agera version is right up there too, but it hasn't been timed yet I don't think.

since the XJ220 there have been production cars such as Mac F1, Lamborghini Diablo 6.0 (so briefly when nobody else was making anything) Enzo Ferrari, Koenigsegg CC/CCS/CCR/CCX


User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3219 posts, RR: 13
Reply 2, posted (12 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2923 times:

Probably a toss-up between the Bugatti Veyron and the latest McLaren GT (GT?). Both are in the 260mph range give or take. I think Jay Leno has one of each. Wonder if he answers his Emails?

Anyhoo, what price speed, and where/when would/could you use it? Regards...jack



all best; jack
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8711 posts, RR: 24
Reply 3, posted (12 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2893 times:

Bugatti Veyron Supersport is on top at 267 MPH, followed by the Hennessy Venom and the Koenigsegg Agera, both of which top out at 260 MPH.

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 2):
Probably a toss-up between the Bugatti Veyron and the latest McLaren GT (GT?)

The only McLaren currently in production is the MP4-12C which only goes 207 MPH (it's meant more for cornering than straight line speed). The planned McLaren P1 is estimated to top out at 239 MPH.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15470 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (12 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2855 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3):
Bugatti Veyron Supersport is on top at 267 MPH,

Guinness recently gave them back the record, although they do not really deserve it since they deactivated a speed limiter so it wasn't really a production car.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3):
followed by the Hennessy Venom

It's record of 265+ miles per hour has never been certified by an outside party. Furthermore, it's status of a "production car" is highly questionable since it is actually built on a heavily modified Lotus chassis. I believe it holds other records, so presumably it would pass muster with the World Records people if they tried, but to me it would still be a gray area.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 1):
The latest Koenigsegg Agera version

They say 270 mph or so for the Agera, but it appears that nobody has ever verified it.

So, with all of those having their various problems as to why they may not count, the actual, least disputable claim to the title is the SSC Ultimate Aero with its 256 mph top speed. SSC has shown a car they have in the works that will be significantly faster, but that project has gone a while with no news.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 6639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (12 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2826 times:

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 1):
Bugatti Veyron SS and Hennessey Venom GT.

It's a tough call calling a bastardised Lotus Elise a production car.

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 2):
McLaren GT (GT?).

McLaren's P1 is not as fast as the F1 was in a straight line, top speed was not a consideration in it's design, just speed around a track.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3):
Hennessy Venom and the Koenigsegg Agera, both of which top out at 260 MPH.

The Venom according to Hennessy is 275mph, but its not really a production car like the Veyron.


User currently offlineB777LRF From Luxembourg, joined Nov 2008, 1208 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (12 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2812 times:

The Venom GT has achieved 267.5 MPH on a 2 mile run. The Veyron SS took 4 miles to do 267.85. Koenigsegg and Pagani have not launched an official claim on the title, with Pagani being more focused on mounting a challenge on the 'Ring, and K..egg not seeming to be officially bothered at all.

Are either of them production cars? Well Guiness will tell you the minimum production run to qualify is 20, but neiter the Venom, any version of a Koenigsegg or the Veyron SS have been built in those numbers; the SS was only built in 5 examples.

One could thus argue neither are the fastest production car, but in reality that accolade should be bestowed on the 'bog standard' Veyron, which does fulfil the criteria of having been built in 20 copies.

So there you have it, it's a Veyron - but not the Veyron you think it is.



From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3219 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (12 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2779 times:

You guys are probably correct about the above. I mentioned the McLaren (we are talking about the three seater, no?) and I recall seeing a TV spot on the car claiming it "fastest" and THINK I remember the mention of around 260mph. Whatever; 160mph is too fast for me these days   regards...jack


all best; jack
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 6639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (12 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2768 times:

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 7):
I mentioned the McLaren (we are talking about the three seater, no?) and I recall seeing a TV spot on the car claiming it "fastest" and THINK I remember the mention of around 260mph.

The McLaren F1, the 3 seater had a maximum top speed of 243 mph with the rev limiter removed, 231 with it on.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 6):
Are either of them production cars?

I would say yes to the Veyron as it a version of the standard Veyron but no to the Venom, it's a bit of a mess if you ask me, bits and pieces from all over the place and not a lot which is Hennessy OEM.


User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15470 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (12 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2749 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 8):
I would say yes to the Veyron as it a version of the standard Veyron but no to the Venom, it's a bit of a mess if you ask me, bits and pieces from all over the place and not a lot which is Hennessy OEM.

The Veyron SS has even less of a claim to the record than the Venom. While the Hennessey is at it's core an Exige chassis, at least you can buy one identical to that which ran at 267 mph. The same cannot be said of the Veyron SS which had a speed limiter removed which decidedly makes it not a production car.

The Venom GT's status as a "production car" is questionable, but the Veyron Super Sport's claim to the record with a removed limiter makes it definitely not a production car.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6106 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (12 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2747 times:

To me, light is right, and fastest on an airport runway is not really interesting, I'd rather be in the cockpit of a plane while speeding down that runway !

Now, I didn't know about the Venom GT, it being based on a Lotus and still relatively light is sparking my interest, although it still seems a little bit too complicated (electronic suspension, electronic rear wing, etc., if the electronics have a malfunction you're dead).

For a more reasonable car and more of a real production car, a car that is "usable" regularly without the need of maintenance every few Km, I'd got for a regular Lotus, the new Exige S with a V6 engine.

For track use I'd go for a Radical SR8. It's the fastest car around the Nürburgring, and since it's designed as a track car, you can actually do several laps before your brakes are dead. It's very light so will do well on any track, not just fast ones like the Nürb.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 4):
Guinness recently gave them back the record, although they do not really deserve it since they deactivated a speed limiter so it wasn't really a production car.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 4):
So, with all of those having their various problems as to why they may not count, the actual, least disputable claim to the title is the SSC Ultimate Aero with its 256 mph top speed.

The Veyron SS limiter is at 258mph.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8711 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (12 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2738 times:

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 6):
Are either of them production cars? Well Guiness will tell you the minimum production run to qualify is 20, but neiter the Venom, any version of a Koenigsegg or the Veyron SS have been built in those numbers; the SS was only built in 5 examples.

According to Bugatti their SuperSport production was 30, out of the total 347 Veyrons sold.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 4):
Guinness recently gave them back the record, although they do not really deserve it since they deactivated a speed limiter so it wasn't really a production car.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 9):
The same cannot be said of the Veyron SS which had a speed limiter removed which decidedly makes it not a production car.

Guinness decided after review that disabling a car's speed limiter "does not alter the fundamental design of the car or its engine.", on which I have to agree.

By the way, Bugatti have announced the launch of the SuperVeyron in September 2013. 1600hp, 288 MPH, 0-60 in 1.8 secs.

http://rumors.automobilemag.com/deep...ml?var_mode=recalcul#axzz2R3LgwVfr



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15470 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (12 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2731 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 11):
Guinness decided after review that disabling a car's speed limiter "does not alter the fundamental design of the car or its engine.", on which I have to agree.

Guinness got it wrong. When you set a record with a car that is equipped in a way that cars sold to the public are not, you simply cannot call it a production car. By the standards they've applied to Bugatti a new ECU chip should also be allowed, despite being undoubtedly a modification. The records people blew this one: if you cannot buy it then it isn't a production car.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6106 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (12 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2718 times:

Well with such cars it's a gray area, I'm sure you can actually buy it without the limiter, each car is unique and very customizable.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15470 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (12 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2713 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 13):
Well with such cars it's a gray area, I'm sure you can actually buy it without the limiter, each car is unique and very customizable.

Nothing gray about it. If the cars aren't produced that way, it's not a production car. All Bugatti would have to do is offer the limiter removal as an option (even if it's at no cost) and I'm fine with it. Until then, it can't be a production car.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1169 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (12 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2684 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 11):
Guinness decided after review that disabling a car's speed limiter "does not alter the fundamental design of the car or its engine.", on which I have to agree.

Agree. One could argue the SS Ultimate Aero is faster because it has no limiter, but that would be absurd. The Veyron is fundamentally a faster car.

Personally I think "production car" should only apply to vehicles with, say, 10,000 examples sold. The problem is that this pissing contest between manufacturers results in some pretty awful vehicles which nobody can really buy and nobody can actually use to their full extent anyway. The Veyron is not a racer- just a jumped up GT car with a ludicrous engine. Hardly worth millions of dollars IMO. The SSC Ultimate Aero is a plastic piece of crap, although at least it's a vaguely more sensible price.

Give me an Ariel Atom and $260,000 any day  



If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8711 posts, RR: 24
Reply 16, posted (12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2672 times:

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 15):
Personally I think "production car" should only apply to vehicles with, say, 10,000 examples sold. The problem is that this pissing contest between manufacturers results in some pretty awful vehicles which nobody can really buy and nobody can actually use to their full extent anyway.

10,000 is way too much. It knocks out all the high-end manufacturers like Ferrari, Aston Martin, Bentley, Lambo, etc. The automotive world would be pretty damned boring without them.

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 15):
The Veyron is not a racer- just a jumped up GT car with a ludicrous engine. Hardly worth millions of dollars IMO.

Actually, in spite of its high price, VW loses several million dollars on each vehicle. It's basically dumping. The purpose of the exercise was to establish Bugatti as a manufacturer of unequaled engineering capability and at the same time great luxury. Unlike the stripped-out cars which approach those speeds where you'd be lucky to have carpets and padded seats and probably need ear protection, the interior of the Veyron is as quiet and luxurious as a Rolls or a Maybach.

The plan for VW was to use the Veyron to launch the brand, and then have Bugatti start making the ultimate luxury cars, like they were in the 30s, where they would compete directly with the likes of Rolls Royce, Bentley, Aston, and others in the $300-$500K price range.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 6639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (12 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2648 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 9):
The same cannot be said of the Veyron SS which had a speed limiter removed which decidedly makes it not a production car.

Rubbish with or without limiter the car is still the same car, with the same powerplant, all that they did was set the computer to lower the topspeed for the customer cars. It's just like the German manufacturers limiting topspeed to 155mph.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 9):
but the Veyron Super Sport's claim to the record with a removed limiter makes it definitely not a production car.

It is and it was done for safety reasons, the tyres were the limiting factor, which makes me wonder how someone like Hennssey can build a car with a potential 275 mph topspeed when there aren't any tyres which can safely reach that speed.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 12):

Guinness got it wrong. When you set a record with a car that is equipped in a way that cars sold to the public are not, you simply cannot call it a production car.

Apart from the Royal Bugatti weren't the makers of ultimate luxury cars in the 1930's they were more like the Ferrari or Lamborghini of the era.

The cars are identical, it's just a limiter. McLarens topspeed was set with the limiter removed yet the customer cars had the limiter installed, Guinness accepted the F1's topspeed as 242 mph whereas the one's you could buy were limited to 231, again this was for tyres reasons.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 16):
and then have Bugatti start making the ultimate luxury cars, like they were in the 30s


User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15470 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (12 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2645 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 17):
Rubbish with or without limiter the car is still the same car, with the same powerplant, all that they did was set the computer to lower the topspeed for the customer cars.

They set the computer in a different manner than the ones they actually produce for customers, hence not a production car.

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 17):
The cars are identical, it's just a limiter.

The limiter is different, so the cars are not identical. It's ridiculous to say that what constitutes a "production car" does not extend to software.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently onlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2809 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (12 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2629 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I go with this little run about

Currently for sale at €927,000

Koenigsegg --- some dynamite Swedish Sports Car


User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 6639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (12 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2614 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 18):

They set the computer in a different manner than the ones they actually produce for customers, hence not a production car.

You can argue all you like but you're wrong.


User currently offlinebristolflyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 2270 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (12 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2568 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 17):
The cars are identical, it's just a limiter.

If something is physically removed from the vehicle after production then surely it isn't a 'production' car. Using this logic could one buy a car, strip out all the unimportant stuff so it is lighter (and faster) and still call it a production car? If you're allowed to remove stuff from the car and still call it a production model why can't we add stuff as well? Top Gear (UK version) recently had an article from Las Vegas where the hosts were racing people in their modified ricer burners and they were easily beating the hosts who were in supercars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_c1H60zlW0

would you say that these are production cars? If not, why not?



Fortune favours the brave
User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3219 posts, RR: 13
Reply 22, posted (12 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2568 times:

Just out of curiosity, just how authoritative should one consider a "Guinness record"? I suppose in the past, it was a respected tradition for points of interest (and actual world records), but currently there are Guinness record TV shows on the number of live cockroaches one can put in the mouth and the record number of hot dogs one can eat in a specific number of minutes.

I guess what I'm thinking is that if the cockroach official spends a lot of time making sure that the roach has all of its legs before inserting into the mouth, how expert could he/she be in determining what the precise definition of a production vehicle actually is?

Seriously, I personally wouldn't rely on the Guinness organization as a definative authority on what constitutes a production vehicle but would opine that building just a handful of vehicles wouldn't constitute "production". I agree with Dreadnought (Rep 16) that 10,000 units is way too much of a requirement for reasons he stated. Maybe 500 units as some official racing bodies in the U.S. formerly required? regards...jack



all best; jack
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6106 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (12 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2554 times:

Again this is complicated because there is no notion of price nor brand image. If more people could afford them, Bugatti would make more cars. Probably not that much though, because their image is also of an exclusive car manufacturer. Even Ferrari was on that page until recently, you could go see them with your nouveau riche Russian dollars and they wouldn't sell you a car until you proved your worth as a real Ferrari fan ! Production was deliberately limited.

I don't know really how to define a production car, but for sure buying a Lotus (or a BMW/Merc/Porsche in the case of many German aftermarket "manufacturers" ) and modifying it more or less extensively cannot meet that definition.

They should maybe concentrate on another definition, like "road legal" but again it's complicated, the US and UK allow pretty much anything on the road (tubes welded around a V8), while in continental Europe if you've not done a crash test and lots of paperwork it ain't happening.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15470 posts, RR: 26
Reply 24, posted (12 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2527 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 20):
You can argue all you like but you're wrong.

Guinness is wrong. The cars are not produced like that, so it isn't a production car.

Quoting bristolflyer (Reply 21):
If something is physically removed from the vehicle after production then surely it isn't a 'production' car.

The only thing they've removed is some software, but that is still enough that it should not be considered a production car.

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 22):
Just out of curiosity, just how authoritative should one consider a "Guinness record"?

Considering their apparent standards of a "production car" they probably should not be considered authoritative at all.

Quoting bristolflyer (Reply 21):
would you say that these are production cars? If not, why not?

No they aren't. They've been modified from the stock form they were sold in.

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 22):
Maybe 500 units as some official racing bodies in the U.S. formerly required?

500 is way too much. I'd say they just have to produce and sell 5 or so identical in configuration, including software, to the car they set the record with.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
25 kiwirob : It's a line of software code, it's not really a physical object, it's not a restrictor plate we're talking about here. I still disagree with you. It'
26 Dreadnought : In fact, the limiter is an artificial restriction on the capabilities of the vehicle. In many cases it is is imposed for political reasons, such as t
27 kiwirob : Funny thing is nobody had a problem with the McLaren F1 and it's then world record of 241 mph when customer cars were restricted to 231 mph, or the J
28 BMI727 : It's a line of code that is not present in the car that set the record and most decidedly does affect the performance. If you modify a production car
29 Post contains images Scooter01 : Who cares about the speed someone can travel in an enclosed vehicle? What about the fun and free feeling of an open car, like the (Lotus or Caterham)
30 bristolflyer : Now we're talking. I had just as much fun in my Caterham than I would have in a car many times quicker.
31 MrChips : All manufacturers are guilty of this to some degree, though not as blatantly as Ferrari. There was an issue of this last year when Ford launched the
32 BMI727 : And there's the Pagani Top Gear tire issue. The tires used to set the time were apparently modified slicks derived from those on the Zonda R which we
33 cptkrell : Hmmmm...BMI727 sez (Rep 24) "I'd say they just have to produce and sell 5 or so identical...." Again, hmmmm...I'd say that myself (or practically anyo
34 BMI727 : You'd be surprised. Most cars this side of the Dale could probably move five examples. Hell, I bet you could move that many in the UAE alone. The rec
35 cptkrell : BMI727; I agree with your post (Rep 34) about "one-offs" record package options per Bugatti as I think you have correctly noted. I just don't think a
36 zckls04 : Indeed, which makes it all the more silly. It's a pointless publicity stunt. OK, well you can argue about the numbers but I'd still argue 20 is too l
37 CXfirst : As I understood it, the only reason for the limiter is that the tyres cannot cope with the top potential speed. But I've also heard that Bugatti have
38 Post contains images Dreadnought : No, there is a very important point being established, if you read the rest of my post. VW wants to get into the high-end luxury car business, but as
39 zckls04 : The exact definition of a publicity stunt- they are trying to get extra publicity with the stunt of producing the fastest car. The fact that they are
40 Dreadnought : No question it is a publicity stunt. Like Concorde. I was protesting your calling it "Pointless".
41 BMI727 : Certainly not production in large numbers, but as far as I'm concerned production only means it has to be produced for customers who may use them on
42 kiwirob : It was Chris Harris who they blacklisted he was one of the few with the balls to stand up to Ferrari. If they're street legal and on the options list
43 Aesma : Even when such rules were adhered to, like for rallye or touring categories (200 units needed), there were still many differences, it was more a ques
44 Post contains images kiwirob : Not really the front and rear clamshell were plastic, as per the rally car. I doubt many could lift the rear clamshell had it been in steel.
45 zckls04 : Ah whoops- yes I was being a bit hyperbolic there. Certainly not pointless for VW I agree. Concorde a publicity stunt though? Not sure I agree. It wa
46 Aesma : My bad. Still many differences just to make it road legal and usable.
47 Post contains images cptkrell : Quoting Kiwirob (Rep 44): "I doubt many people could lift the rear clamshell had it been in steel." You have heard of gas struts, no? Quoting Aesma (R
48 kiwirob : Can you see any gas struts in the picture?
49 BMI727 : Then he bought a silver 599 and he has gotten his hands on a black 458 customer car since in a video. After further review there was no problem. Appa
50 cptkrell : Kiwirob (Rep 48): Yep, you're right! Looking closer it appears that they are simple rod props. My bad. Looks like a two-person operation, though, even
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Which Is Your Favourite City In The World? posted Sun Jan 3 2010 11:53:51 by F.pier
Which Is The World's Tallest Residential Building? posted Wed Sep 12 2007 10:16:05 by United Airline
Europeans: Barabus TKR Fastest Car In The World! posted Tue Jul 3 2007 22:10:17 by LOT767-300ER
Which Is The Most Beautiful City In The World? posted Sun Jul 9 2000 20:42:08 by Virgin_luva
Which Is The Better Buy: PS3 Or Xbox 360? posted Sun Sep 6 2009 08:03:22 by Hawaiian763
Which Is The Largest Ikea On Earth? posted Fri May 29 2009 02:05:37 by United Airline
Switzerland Is The Top Railway User In The World posted Sat Mar 3 2007 03:23:30 by BA
America Is Not What's Wrong With The World posted Tue Sep 26 2006 08:44:30 by UH60FtRucker
Is Starbucks Killing People Around The World? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 02:29:48 by Jetjack74
What Is Your City Like During The World Cup? posted Sat Jun 10 2006 20:50:13 by BA