Talk:SSC Ultimate Aero

Needs updating it say will will be in 2006 and attempt again in May in Germany which failed at 240 MPH Uber555 03:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

This page is basically about one thing. The effort SSC is making to create the car that will go faster than the Veyron.

It's tongue in cheek promotion and exagerates the importance of this car in automotive history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.41.244.210 (talk) 19:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm quite curious, it looks like a Lamborghini Diablo replica kit car, with Ford Focus (?) headlights. 60.50.48.148 17:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Eh, let's see what it can do in Germany on VW's five mile straight. Beat the Bugatti on its home turf. Since it is a German Car underneath it all.Titmanisdaman 20:10, 19 December 2007

Dat acceleration?

It says that "SSC claims that the car can accelerate from 0-180 mph in 2.5 secs." and then citation needed. That's 6 times faster than the McClaren F1 and I seriously doubt that that information is correct. Maybe the author of that bit meant 180 kph, not mph.

Afunyun (talk) 05:41, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The SSC Aero Has NOT Been Verified As World's Fastest Production Cars

Please read the entire article you referenced for 'world's fastest production car' before you post the SSC as such next time, even in the article it states "The data, collected by Dewetron's world-renowned GPS tracking system, will be verified by Guinness before the Ultimate Aero is officially crowned the "World's Fastest Production Car."" Therefore I have removed the reference, for now. There are also questions about whether or not the SSC Aero qualifies as a "production car" based on claims that the car is A) not street legal, and B) has few if any units sold. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RTShadow (talk • contribs) 23:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

• Most Supercar manufacturers, who's cars could beat this, do not put their cars forward for testing because their cars are almost always customised for each customer, and so do not qualify (have SCC ever sold the unmodified base model as tested?), and many of them do not even advertise a top speed because it is irrelevant to the people who they sell them to, since it is unlikely in the extreme that they will ever be able to achieve that speed, since they do not have access to required very long track, real-world track performance is much more important (acceleration, handling, breaking, etc.) rather than raw speed, what this means is that this car is only the fastest that has been tested, not that it is really the fastest .... ^{lɘɘяɘM яɘɫƨɐƮ} 13:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It's official! SSC Aero is the fastest!

It is oct. 11, and Guinness has made it official. It is the fastest. In regards to that, I think the article needs a bit of cleaning, especially in the 'Speed Attempt' section. So much for my Bugatti fanboyism :)

For the sake of fairness, keep in mind that Veyron does go as fast as 407.6 kmph, not 378 kmph as stated in the article. I have just witnessed this with my eyes. Also, how reliable are data produced by the car manufacturer? Isn't it supposed to be INDEPENDENT testing?

As of "Bugatti fanboyism", the cars are incomperable. Speed record version of Aero is nothing but a stripped production version, aimed at one and only goal - prove American muscle once again. I have not seen them stripping anything off Veyron to go for 407 kmph. All the luxury was stil there. Oranges and apples, oranges and apples.76.104.253.138 (talk) 01:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• The Production version of the SSC Ultimate Aero TT will not do this speed, only the speed attempt stripped version, they are only producing 25 of them (and most will not be the Ultimate TT) is this really a "production car"? The Bugatti Veyron will do this speed and has been shown to repeatably (Top Gear Showed this on Camera) on available fuel (not specialist 91-octane fuel used in the SSC) and they have already made 132+... Also is it really "Road Legal" a large chunk of the weight of the Veyron and the Koenigsegg CCR are engine (obviously), and safety systems to make it road legal and drivable....? I Notice the Guinness Certificate notes the speed (which I don't dispute) but does not mention a specific record? The Thrust SSC can go faster but is not road legal, or easy to drive...? ^{lɘɘяɘM яɘɫƨɐƮ} 14:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Spec Version that did the test : 2006 Number sold : 0

Current and 2007 spec is heavier and so is unproven to do this speed ... ^{lɘɘяɘM яɘɫƨɐƮ} 11:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

The SSC Ultimate Aero is not proven to have achived such speed. That is still to be seen by everyone. The Guinness World Record certificate does no make it true. What would make it true is a test under credible scrutiny, with reputable experts, caught on a camera for everyone to see. Everyone say the F1... Everyone saw the CCR... Everyone saw the Veyron... But noone has seen the SSC Ultimate Aero reach the claimed top speed. Until then, it's bullshit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.243.180.184 (talk) 18:28, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Unless there is any proof that the verification process is done improperly, the involve parties are assumed innocent and verified record stays. Do you seriously think Guinness judges would turn a blind eye on someone rigging the land speed record tests? - Jacob Poon (talk) 22:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Units

Shouldn't this article be in US Standard units with the metric units in parentheses as the car is American made? --134.173.56.209 (talk) 08:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it should be. I've done this for the 2006 car section, but it takes a lot of time. Feel free to help! I've cited a wayback cached source for most of the information in that section, which isn't reeeeeally what I would like to do, but the current SSC homepage does only cover the 2007 car. TNC (talk) 20:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

bugatti have no problemos with putting there car on a streight (NO MODIFICATION!) and it'll hit its top speed! the aero is a dif matter, it takes time, and its only happened a few times, plus u saw it with your own eyes?, its a fact that no one has actully been in the car whilst its been doing the speed runs (inderpentdant ajudicators!), to be honest, they have paid guinesse wold of record some money so there's can be the fastest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.180.53 (talk) 19:09, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Units - discussion 2

I think SI should be primary as this not US-specific topic (although the vehicle was produced in the US). It has world significance because of its record and that's why SI should be primary. SkyBon^{Talk/Contributions} 14:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Uh, no. If it's designed/built/produced in the US, it's a US product. - BilCat (talk) 16:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

The SSC Ultimate Aero is an American-built.. everything else in the article like spelling and dates are US. SI units would be out of place as primary unit. MilborneOne (talk) 18:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

By now, this is fairly outdated, but...competitions for the fastest production car isn't a US-centric thing. It's a world-wide competition. Not to mention the fact that the US is pretty much the last hold-out of Imperial measurements in the world...85.229.60.8 (talk) 22:38, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

• Not true - the UK still uses miles and feet/inches, even if we have mostly dropped the yard measurement. Wikipedia standards are for things to follow their national spellings and formatting. Wherever a source is present, I updated the numbers to reflect that source. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:11, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Conflicting Values

I don't know much about cars but it seems to me that '6.2-litre (387.4 cu. in.)' and '6.35-litre (387.2 cu. in.)' are conflicting values. As 6.35 litres is greater than 6.2 litres, the cu. in. values should represent that. However, the second cu. in. value is lower than the first. Any explanation/thoughts? PookeyMaster (talk) 09:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The official site references 4.125" x 3.620" which is indeed 6.35 litres or 387.24 cu in. However, the site (and this page by citation) also quotes impossible torque and gearing figures -- if the car is producing 1094 ft lbs of torque at 6150 rpm, it is producing 1281 hp at that same speed! Going from the 1183 hp figure, the engine is producing 893 ft lbs at 6950 rpm, so a peak of 920-950 at 6150 rpm would be most likely. And on the gearing: the site's 0.6452/3.44 gearing and 335/30ZR20 tyres would produce a top speed of 218mph at 7200 rpm. A final drive of around 2.7 would produce the speeds the car is reputed to make. The numbers they quote (0.357 cd, 1183hp, etc) would produce a car which is technically capable of the 273mph they talk about a lot. Whether or not the numbers are accurate is up to them. TNC (talk) 23:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's entirely up to them: we shouldn't be quoting the figures if the only source is biased (nor just quote car magazines that, for their part, are just repeating the figures Shelby gives them). You're right, some of those numbers are patent nonsense. Also, the conflict PookeyMaster notes regarding the displacement is real,, and we should address it in some way. If anyone cares about this car, how about trying to find a reputable source for engine size, in cu. in. or liters? atakdoug (talk) 23:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Street Legality

The only place in this article that it is mentioned that the car is street legal, is in the category box thingy at the bottom.

Is the car street legal? Is this verified? MSNBC thinks it is, but I'm not convinced.

  Yes, it is.  I just took a picture of one today outside of Microsoft's Studio-A building in Redmond, WA and it had WA State license plat # 0792 A  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.125.136.105 (talk) 06:32, 14 October 2011 (UTC) 

Why were the fuel efficiency stats removed?

Someone re-add them. They are useful pieces of information. Malamockq (talk) 01:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Speed Record

"The first run clocked 257.41 mph (414.26 km/h) and the return trip 254.88 mph (410.19 km/h), with the average beating the Bugatti Veyron's speed by 235 mph (378.2 km/h). The results of this test, verified by Guinness World Records on October 9, 2007, gave the SSC Ultimate Aero the title of world's fastest production car."

Not sure what that's supposed to say but it's wrong. 98.223.170.167 (talk) 00:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Unless I'm doing the math wrong, the average of 257.41 and 254.88 is not 257.15 Barhamd (talk) 08:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Guinness World Records are not a credible entity. The car still hasn't been tested under a credible scrutiny. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.244.181.133 (talk) 11:54, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Copyright?????

Large sections of this article are copied verbatim fromt eh companies website. Unless there is some justification for this this article is a copyright violation and should be put up for deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.203.183.146 (talk) 01:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

• Due to this being a small car manufacturer with a very limited dealership (Only one listed?) there are very few sources... but verbatim copying is bad especially without independent references ....^{lɘɘяɘM яɘɫƨɐƮ} 13:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Mid-engine is not verified?

That's silly. Not only is it obviously mid engined just by looking at it, but it's also clearly listed as such on SSC's own page here:

http://www.shelbysupercars.com/car-specs.php

Don't see why something that obvious needs a citation, but it is verifiable if necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.220.112 (talk) 06:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

No longer incumbent? Not verified!

The Weber F1 only claims to be faster than the Ultimate Aero. This fact has not been officially recorded. The status should remain incumbent until such time that it is officially not. If we go by claimed top speed, then the Aero should be fastest with an estimated top speed of 434 km/h. As far as I'm concerned, the only supercar to ever reach its estimated top speed is the Bugatti Veyron, and that car costs the company 2 million pounds. Anybody? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinfulparade (talk • contribs) 08:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The Weber F1

Somebody needs to stop people from posting the Weber F1 as being the fastest street-legal car in the world. This fact has not been verified. And where did the 2009 specs go?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinfulparade (talk • contribs) 07:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

The SSC Ultimate Aero has also not been verfied to be the fastest production car in the world. A Guinness World Record certificate is not a credible evidence as are not Guinnes rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.244.183.8 (talk) 13:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Images?

Shouldn't we put images in this article? The other super fast cars (McLaren F1, Bugatti Veyron, etc.) have pictures of them. Why not this? It wastes time to look at this then google the images, so we might as well put some here. FstrthnU (talk) 02:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• there have been several attempts at this, but the difficulty is getting hold of a free image, all the ones attempted so far are from commercial sources, with attached copyright (a no go on Wikipedia) ^{lɘɘяɘM яɘɫƨɐƮ} 13:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Evidence of claimed performance

We already seen cars like the Bugatti Veyron and the Ferrari FXX (so exclusive this last one, that Ferrari doesn't give it to you, even if you buy it!!), on TV programs like BBC's Topgear...

What I ask is this... Why don't the people responsible by the conception of the SSC Ultimate Aero, loan one of those cars to a reputable TV motor show like the mentioned "Topgear"?

If everyone is so sure that thge car is that fast, what is keeping you? Face it... Until it gets done, more and more people will question the claimed top speed. As far as I'm concerned, a Guinness World Records certificate isn't a credible evidence. You can buy everything these days with the right amount of cash.

Doubts

Let's think about it, shall we? After we saw the VW guys, cracking their heads over and over again with the Veyron, for years going back to square one, how can a car like the SSC Ultimate Aero, with a 1990's design, with almost 1200 bhp on two wheels alone, on a road instead of a race track, could achieve such a speed? I mean, look at the McLaren F1... When the guy reached 375 kph, the car almost seemed to desintegrate! The driver thought that he should stop the car... The McLaren F1 doesn't even have 700 bhp!! And the CCR?? It's scary when your reach the 390 kph!! Either the Volkswagen guys in Germany didn't find the best engineers (because they were working in the USA!!), or all this about the SSC Ultimate Aero is just a publicity stunt for a small car manufacturer... Which is it? Still waiting for the answer, because there's something about this that doesn't seem right... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.243.119.111 (talk) 21:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Simple. Americans engineers are smarter than the German ones.Bill Heller (talk) 12:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Not anymore, apparently. 124.168.45.4 (talk) 16:14, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Criticism/Skepticism, Top Speed Claim

this section doesn't contain any sources and isn't NPOV in the least. here are a few examples... "...that according to some do not seem credible or even feasible." no source

"Jeremy Clarkson said that the test driver was "a 71 year old man", and that he does not believe that the car really is better than the Bugatti Veyron." no source, irrelevent

"Some critics do admit the possibility that the car does indeed live up to the Guinness World of Records certificate..." who?

"...but that does not in any way mean the car is better than the Veyron." irrelevent, not NPOV, out right opinionated

...etc., etc. further more, the last claim... "In spite of all doubts and criticisms and the way these are qualified, it is true however that the SSC Ultimate Aero has never been shown on camera and under credible circumstances (such as having its speed measured by a GPS tachometer) reaching the claimed speed." ...is NOT true. a video of the run, as well as the telemetry of the run, can be found HERE. the telemetry was gathered by a Dewetron GPS data aquisition system, as confirmed HERE. also, this is the SAME GPS data aquisition system used by Top Gear during James May's Bugatti Veyron top speed run, as confirmed HERE. this proof pretty much dismisses this section entirely, and i don't think that it would be a stretch to say that there are some fanboys here that are a little disappointed about the Veyron being beat by this 'lowely' small time american manufacturer or something.

BTW, i'm not exactly a wiki-expert here, so my appologies if i didn't do everything perfectly. either way though, i believe i made my point.Ry Trapp0 (talk) 09:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

• I believe the top speed claim verified by Guinness - 257 mph, for the pre-production model in 2007, however the claims of greater speed with the current model are suspect unless verified? The Veyron that was clocked by Guinness was a full production model with all the standard accessories, and it has been shown repeatedly that consumer models can still do this speed, the SSC measured by Guinness was a pre-production model specially stripped down for the test, none of the later production models have been tested by an independent tester since, the problem people have is not can someone make a car faster than a Veyron, since they obviously can (at least one model of the SSC is), and many manufacturers have made one-offs or limited runs of cars that can go considerably faster, but is the standard production car they are currently making capable of this speed? this is what I and many people doubt ^{lɘɘяɘM яɘɫƨɐƮ} 17:08, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• • so, do you have proof of these claims(I.E., reliable sources, not a forum post from some random nobody) or are you just repeating here-say? not only was the record ultimate aero a street legal production model, it was also auctioned off as a completely street legal car. it would not be street legal if it were not a production car, since pre-production cars aren't issued VINs.
  • correct, the current model top speed is theoretical, and has always been listed as theoretical.
  • the Veyron was NOT clocked by Guinness, and Bugatti STILL has yet to make a record run that conforms to the standard requirement of making one run in each direction within 1 hour of each other. this is a standard requirement by the 2 largest land speed record keeping organizations in the world, FIA and SCTA, as well as the standard requirement by Guinness too. this requirement has been met by McLaren when they set the not-so-production record(pre-pro car, limiter removed, look it up) with the F1, this has been met by Koenigsegg when they beat the F1s record with the CCR, and this has now been met by SSC with the Ultimate Aero TT when they beat the CCRs official record.
  • again, ALL Veyron top speed runs have been in ONE direction, which makes them all ineligable for the record claim. this requirement is in place to prevent a tail wind or a downward slope from artificially increasing the cars top speed. no matter how many times a Veyron can hit the top speed in one run, it is still inelligable and unofficial by ALL top speed recording standards.
  • the Koengisegg CCR was never independently tested for top speed. the McLaren F1 has never been independently tested for top speed. the Jaguar XJ220(CATs removed, rev limiter removed) has never been independently tested for top speed. the Bugatti EB110 has never been independently tested for top speed. while this is a valid point it is an INVALID reason to claim that the Ultimate Aero TT isn't the current fastest car in the world.
  • whatever problems people "have" with the SSC is absoloutley irrelevent to wikipedia, let alone ANY encyclopedia. this is based on facts, not opinions. the fact that all previous top speed production car record holders from the past 2 decades have been verified by Guinness makes ALL of these arguements asinine and irrelevent. 'doubts' are not 'facts', so they don't have any place on wikipedia unless they are from someone who actually matters(automotive journalist or what have you).
  • i'm removing this section in one(1) week if it hasn't been edited for NPOV and all quotes and statements cited to reliable sources. i don't have any problem with the section(NPOV'd and cited of course) what so ever, but it doesn't belong unless it follows wikipedias standards.Ry Trapp0 (talk) 22:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

The internet video that can be found on YouTube is not credible. The image is split in half. On one half, you can see the pilot. On the other, you can see a computer animation. That is no evidence. That is as credible as a Guinness World Records certificate. The car still has to be shown, on camera, having its speed measured by a GPS tachometer, unde credible circumstances. Until then, the fastest production car is the Bugatti Veyron. What is not up to wikipedia's standards are YouTube videos to be considered credible evidence. If the SSC Ultimate Aero really is the world's fastest supercar, like SSC claims, the brand will have no problem in loaning one Ultimate Aero to be properly tested, on track, and having its top speed measured with a GPS tachometer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.205.68 (talk) 11:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

• • • Was the SSC Ultimate Aero the the world fastest production car : Yes the Guinness certificate proves it, so it is not alleged, rumoured or whatever it is the record holder (unless something is now faster), Is the Veyron faster than this : No, Was the Veyron ever the official record holder : Not sure, Was is unofficially the holder : Yes it was at one time faster than the record holder at the time and was at the time a production car - but this was not verified by Guinness ... ^{lɘɘяɘM яɘɫƨɐƮ} 12:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

So, in your perspective, the Guinness certificate is the only, ultimate proof? Well, that says it all about you "wikipedia standards". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.243.119.107 (talk) 16:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia standards: shelbysupercars.com an youtube.com. 'Nough said. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.165.98 (talk) 18:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm surprised people are still arguing about this crap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.111.150.86 (talk) 16:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

if Guinness isn't "CREDIBLE" enough, then PLEASE tell me who is. seriously, who is more credible than guinness to suggest that a specific car is the fastest production car in the world? is it the German government, who have said that the Veyron officially went 253MPH(in one direction only)? is it FIA who has never acknowledged an official fastest production car in the world? is it SCTA who has never acknowledged an official fastest production car? FACT IS, Guinness is the ONLY organization that has regularly kept records on the fastest production cars in the world, which automatically makes them far more credible than any other suggestion that has yet to be presented. i'm sure your the same ones to argue "official" nurburgring times, right?

you guys are so quick to point out that "this isn't evidence" or "that isn't evidence", yet you have yet to provide ANY of your own. you say "there isn't video of the run like there is for the Veyron", then when it's provided "OMG, a youtube video srsly?!one". nevermind the lack of video "featuring both the car and a GPS tachometer" for the CCR, or the F1, or the XJ220, or the EB110. and nevermind that these so called "credible circumstances", which aren't defined anywhere on the face of the earth, didn't exist until the SSC Ultimate Aero TT came around. and nevermind that these "credible circumstances" lack the internationally recognized rule of making 1 run in each direction within 1 hour, which would automatically disqualify the Veyron in the first place...

until we see any REAL proof that this car is NOT the record holder, then 'innocent until proven guilty'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ry Trapp0 (talk • contribs) 04:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Have you been to YouTube and searched for: "Bugatti Veyron"? You can see James May, on the BBC TV show, "Topgear", reaching almost 408 km/h measured in a GPS tachometer. You'll find that it is way different from a split screen, where you see a pilot on one side, and a CG animation on the other. I can get a Guinness World Records certificate... Just get to ebay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.241.149.125 (talk) 21:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

The problem that geeks on either side of this debate never seem to think about- Okay, so Guinness verifying a two-way run independently isn't good enough. Then Top Gear's run in the Veyron certainly isn't good enough- the baseline minimum for any topspeed record *IS* the Guinness test of running a route both ways to account for wind and elevation- I don't see windsocks in the Top Gear video, so that test is clearly unreliable (rolleyes). So NEITHER car has a valid claim to the title- so who does have the top speed record? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.83.118.230 (talk) 13:48, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Well in that case the Mclaren F1 (242mph) is top and then the Koeniggsegg CCR [?] (240mph).Spinodontosaurus (talk) 18:57, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

This bit seems rather opinionated and is uncited:

However there was controversy that the Bugatti Veyron would be faster than the Aero if Bugatti removed the additions added to the Veyron for the driver's comfort (heating, average size boot, radio, etc.).

How can you remove the heating, the boot (?), and what effect will removing the radio have on the 250mph+ top speed of a 2 tonne car? Complete nonsense, and anyway even if it did make a difference, that's not the point as the Veyron has all those things so it's silly to speculate what sped it could get. And where was this "controversy" anyway? Unless it is cited this sentence will be removed shortly. Feudonym (talk) 09:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

So what you people are saying is that your not convinced until Top Gear drives the car right? You remind me of the birthers. Though I would love to see Top Gear drive the Aero.--Arm (talk) 06:58, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Infobox

What on earth is that all about?Mr Larrington (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

W18???

the page says this car has a 10 liters three turbo W18 engine... it's obviously a silly joke: it's a car, not a lorry. AFAIK in the real world the car has a 6.2 liters twin turbo V8

Silly joke is a polite term - it's usually called vandalism. I can see you've corrected it, thanks - perhaps you might like to consider creating an account and becoming a regular editor? Bertcocaine (talk) 22:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Article About SSC Aero II

Someone has added article regarding SSC Aero II whose name is not yet officially unveiled. Also, the article is total copy and paste from topgear website with future references like it will rev to 9000rpm etc. This article should be rephrased in present sentence with the claims of company rather then complete copy and paste.

I've inserted a cleanup template for that section - although reading your comment about it being copied, I'm wondering if that's enough.. So presumably the source is just quoted at length, rather than just headlined? Poor Grammar on the part of the BBC methinks! Bertcocaine (talk) 22:41, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, just looked at the source and it's not copied at all! And so backs up very little of the info, and most certainly not the name as you say. Did you mean 'present tense' above? Bertcocaine (talk) 22:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

If none of the claims have been verified, is it appropriate at all to include them in something that desires to appear like an encyclopedia?124.168.16.94 (talk) 11:22, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Ssc-ultimate-aero.jpg Deleted

	An image used in this article, File:Ssc-ultimate-aero.jpg, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons by Adrignola for the following reason: Missing essential information such as license, permission or source What should I do?
	A different bot should have (or will soon) remove the image code from the article text (check if this has been done correctly). If you think the image deletion was in error please raise the issue at Commons. You could also try to search for new images to replace the old one. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotification (talk) 20:01, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on SSC Aero. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100103092154/http://shelbysupercars.com/press/Press%20Release%2010-09-2007.pdf to http://www.shelbysupercars.com/press/Press%20Release%2010-09-2007.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:21, 14 January 2016 (UTC)