I find it interesting that this is almost the complete opposite of what Motor Trend found when they put the Aston and Jag up against each other in a recent Head 2 Head feature. The conditions (cold, wet UK vs dry, warm US) really play such a pivotal role in the outcome of the test.
I wish people calmed down. Calling Autocar guys names is just silly. I've seen the Motortrend comparo too and I would take the Jag without thinking twice. But I don't think anyone is lying here. Both tests were taken on different tracks under different conditions by different people. My thanks to Autocar for doing their job.
After watching MT's video review of XKR-S GT vs Vantage S, I can't believe how this two reviews are exactly opposite. AutoCar: Aston is faster, better grip, mentions good transmission. MotorTrend: Jag is faster, better grip, and much better transmission than Aston. I guess I should by both and decide which one to keep later :D
Also one is in a hot sunny Laguna Seca while the other is in a rainy Castle Combe. US-market cars may also have different tires, different engine tuning for low octane fuel etc.
Haha. I was just about to say the same thing! I understand people's opinions but what they were saying about the which car is faster, grip, transmission, etc is totally opposite.
One theme is consistent in both reviews: the Aston has more front end grip. In this review it comes out as "more hooked front end", while MT said something like "too much oversteer" :)
***** The fact that AutoCar's review was on slightly wet track, takes this reviews even more apart. Here in wet conditions Aston was capable of producing more grip vs Jaguar, while on dry it struggled to keep car going straight. Opinions can have a large effect on review on things like which exhaust sounds better. But Lap Times are not opinions. Also transmission behavior should not be affected by subjective vision. Both are reputable magazines and along with drivers....
Nodar Svanidze Exactly right. I mean it really just doesn't make sense to me the conclusions that both magazines came to. I don't want to say someone is lying or anything like that but something is fishy for sure.
I would say since Jag has somewhat of a race car build, having a big rear wing and a roll cage, it certainly gets much more rear grip and could be better for some grip racing, but on damp track where you would lose your rear grip more easily, Jag could get a little more dicey and Aston could end up more controlable since it's lighter. I believe that's what happened here.
Motor trend just reviewed the jaguar xk-rs gt and aston martin v12 vantage s and their review is more convincing and bring opposite conclusions. The the jaguar is the better balanced car and holds the power down better than the aston. Its also quicker around the track on the timed lap!!! Well done jaguar, Aston you need to up your game.
The Mercedes looks awful. It looks an Arab taxi with all those bits of chintz and brash spoiler. The Jag looks very purposeful with the aero (which actually works)
It never stops to amaze me how people have different taste, for me personally the mercedes looks astounding, and the aston looks like a catfish, while the jag has copied the design from the aston, its not my intention to provoke an argument, I am just expressing my opinion, best regards
Wow! The areo works on the Jag and not the Merc? Hmm are you trolling or just plain stupid? The matter of looks is very subjective but i have to say that your taste is pretty poor! At least your comparison with the AMG and a "arab taxi" wasn't exactly spot on. You sir, are a douche in every sense of the meaning!
MrNehva and I will also express my opinion on you :))) you are dumbass. dumbass because you dont know Jaguar is designed by guy who also worked on the image of Aston,which their new models have now.(otherwise you would not have said COPY).And also dumbass because you think ugliest car here looks astounding,which really confuses me how someone can call Aston Catfish and Jag(from your logic) Copy of Catfish while likes appereance of this Merc. I know its your personal Taste or you are just Brand Fanboy but anyways I think reasons are enough to call you dumbass.
It is funny that Motor Trend tested the Jag and Aston and came up with the opposite conclusion that the Jag was the better car and IIRC faster and cheaper.
The times might be from someone standing at the start-finish line and then radioed to Steve. I guess they edited that exchange out. Either that or the car has a built-in lap timer
TheCarxpert You can't just say a car is faster in the dry when these cars are so evenly matched. Some chassis' work better with certain tracks over others. For instance, the Jag might be faster around the Nurburgring for instance but the Aston might be much quicker at Hockenheim hard to tell really. Sounds like the Aston is the better car to drive and that's what is most important!
Viking Power Depends on which track! Willow springs suits traction limited cars better so that’s probably why the Jag was quicker. I’d like to see the same event round a twisty circuit.
This is the only Head to Head where the Aston V12 beats the XKRS-GT. Why? Probably cause Autocar always picks rainy days to test 700 NM Jaguars. On a dry country road or Autobahn this XK-GT slightly pulls away from both, as will any normal XKR-S.
357callahan No , driving in the wet is a vital part of any car test. I would rather pick the potentially slower aston if it doesn't kill me in the wet. if the aston is super quick and usable in both wet and dry so is overall the better car
Happy the Aston won although the humidity in the headlights wasn't very nice thing to see. In a general note, you guys have great tests but I think you should try to liven up the videos. Maybe Steve should work on his voice a bit to make it more exciting for the viewer. It will make a lot of difference.
Motortrend review was way better, they used a pro racing driver and he said the Jag was comfortably the best, I trust a professional more than a journalist...
Randy Pobst is an indisputable professional both as a racing driver and as a person,the XKR GT is the fastest of the three, we have no doubt who is not objective here.
It says dual clutch in the C63s description, which is incorrect. It's an automatic transmission with planetry gears and a wet multi plate clutch instead of the torque converter. Only the SLS and A45 have dual clutch gearboxes at this point.
How is this Steve guy allowed to set the lap times? He obviously is not a good driver, when Randy Pobst drove the Jag and the Aston for motortrend, same day, same track, same conditions (referring to the motortrend test) he got exactly reverse results. You could see Steve struggling to deal with the torque of the Jag and obviously he just is not that competent behind the wheel. When Randy Pobst is getting exact opposite results 999/1000 times you're the one that messed up, he is a world class race car driver not some writer who gets to drive on camera. What a complete sham of a test.
nbrigdan I know who Randy is, he is a great driver no doubt, but apparently you didn't know what you were talking about when you said Steve "obviously is not a good driver"
You got opposite results and you ended up thinking this guy must be a bad driver and couldn't make Jag run fast. Sorry, dead wrong. He is a touring car race driver too. Probably Randy is faster but that's irrelevant here. This Steve guy is apparently good enough. If you want to know why the difference occured, you have to find the reason elsewhere.
In other comparisons with professional racing drivers this specific Jag is 2-3 secs faster than the specific Aston. Diffirence is the dump-wet track surface and the driver. So?
Interesting that the Jaguar was quite a bit faster than the Aston on a dry track in California. Perhaps they need a racing driver to evaluate them? Oh, and some dry weather would help.
Surprised about the results.... the jag murdered the Aston with Randy at the wheel on head 2 head. Watch both videos, you be the judge, but keep in mind that Randy is a professional racing driver.
Motor trend lapped the xkrs GT 2 sec faster than the vantage around willow Springs on dry tarmac. Who goes to a track day when it's raining except for those who don't have the choice like the journalist & real racing drivers but the people who buy this car won't go to the track when it's raining. Useless comparison with great cars.
Maybe the fact that the Aston has a N/A engine vs supercharged engines for the Merc and the Jag, helps the Aston in slippery conditions such as those of the test here, because the power application is better modulated. Glad it won, because the Aston is a fabulous car. The price difference relative to the Mer, which is quite ordinary next to the Aston (ordinary body, looks, interior, and V8 only) is not that important.
the regular V12 aston costs almost half a million in australia, I don't know what the S costs. C63 AMGs are about 160k. The black series sold out but cost $240k. I'd take two black series (one for the wife) over the aston in that case.
Laptimes notwithstanding, all 3 of these cars are too heavy and too luxurious to be bought for trackdays. Most of the time they'll be used on the road. And that's where the Jag and the Merc will look like boy-racer tuner car version of their respective models, while the Aston will remain classy (especially without that optional carbon rear panel)!
Jag sounds the best, Merc is better for the everyday, and the Aston is kinda in the middle. wont say anything on looks, because everyone has diffrent taste, but for me the Jag looks the best, Merc looks so dull compared to the other two.
Hmmmmmm Aston needs a new body but in power ( blue ) is it still not fit or what...... Why not put the 911 turbo s up here have two German two Brits. Why. Two vs Two
lol mercedes looks like ordinary car there, who the fuck would chose it. P.S.Motortrend review was more complex and Jag won there so I have no idea for what are they saying Aston is better.
£130,000 for the Jag!!! Wow! Really? Man, rich people got more money than sense!!! I don't get it! These cars have been made significantly more expensive whilst being made less suitable for the road and everyday use. So therefore we have to assume that they are very expensive 'play things' with track days in mind, right? But if it was a focussed track day car you wanted why the heck would you buy one of these hijacked luxury grand tourers? Just buy Caterham or a lotus 7, then save yourself 100 grand, with that buy yourself a used Porsche 911 turbo or a GTR, what the heck you could buy both and still have enough change left over to buy a nice Merc for your daily commute! That's '4' top purpose designed car for the price of one! You know what, I think that's what I'll do. ;-)
I find it interesting that this is almost the complete opposite of what Motor Trend found when they put the Aston and Jag up against each other in a recent Head 2 Head feature.
The conditions (cold, wet UK vs dry, warm US) really play such a pivotal role in the outcome of the test.
Would choose the Jag any day just because of how aggressive it is. Also it is the one car there that will just keep going up in value.
I wish people calmed down. Calling Autocar guys names is just silly. I've seen the Motortrend comparo too and I would take the Jag without thinking twice. But I don't think anyone is lying here. Both tests were taken on different tracks under different conditions by different people.
My thanks to Autocar for doing their job.
JAG! All day every day.
After watching MT's video review of XKR-S GT vs Vantage S, I can't believe how this two reviews are exactly opposite.
AutoCar: Aston is faster, better grip, mentions good transmission.
MotorTrend: Jag is faster, better grip, and much better transmission than Aston.
I guess I should by both and decide which one to keep later :D
Also one is in a hot sunny Laguna Seca while the other is in a rainy Castle Combe. US-market cars may also have different tires, different engine tuning for low octane fuel etc.
Haha. I was just about to say the same thing! I understand people's opinions but what they were saying about the which car is faster, grip, transmission, etc is totally opposite.
One theme is consistent in both reviews: the Aston has more front end grip. In this review it comes out as "more hooked front end", while MT said something like "too much oversteer" :)
***** The fact that AutoCar's review was on slightly wet track, takes this reviews even more apart. Here in wet conditions Aston was capable of producing more grip vs Jaguar, while on dry it struggled to keep car going straight.
Opinions can have a large effect on review on things like which exhaust sounds better. But Lap Times are not opinions. Also transmission behavior should not be affected by subjective vision.
Both are reputable magazines and along with drivers....
Nodar Svanidze Exactly right. I mean it really just doesn't make sense to me the conclusions that both magazines came to. I don't want to say someone is lying or anything like that but something is fishy for sure.
Great and honest review, thanks for that Autocar!
I would say since Jag has somewhat of a race car build, having a big rear wing and a roll cage, it certainly gets much more rear grip and could be better for some grip racing, but on damp track where you would lose your rear grip more easily, Jag could get a little more dicey and Aston could end up more controlable since it's lighter.
I believe that's what happened here.
Motor trend just reviewed the jaguar xk-rs gt and aston martin v12 vantage s and their review is more convincing and bring opposite conclusions.
The the jaguar is the better balanced car and holds the power down better than the aston. Its also quicker around the track on the timed lap!!!
Well done jaguar, Aston you need to up your game.
The Mercedes looks awful. It looks an Arab taxi with all those bits of chintz and brash spoiler. The Jag looks very purposeful with the aero (which actually works)
you sound stupid
StepmaniaFreek It must be hard being you. I'm sure your care worker gives you crayons to play with. bless
It never stops to amaze me how people have different taste, for me personally the mercedes looks astounding, and the aston looks like a catfish, while the jag has copied the design from the aston, its not my intention to provoke an argument, I am just expressing my opinion, best regards
Wow! The areo works on the Jag and not the Merc? Hmm are you trolling or just plain stupid? The matter of looks is very subjective but i have to say that your taste is pretty poor! At least your comparison with the AMG and a "arab taxi" wasn't exactly spot on.
You sir, are a douche in every sense of the meaning!
MrNehva and I will also express my opinion on you :))) you are dumbass.
dumbass because you dont know Jaguar is designed by guy who also worked on the image of Aston,which their new models have now.(otherwise you would not have said COPY).And also dumbass because you think ugliest car here looks astounding,which really confuses me how someone can call Aston Catfish and Jag(from your logic) Copy of Catfish while likes appereance of this Merc. I know its your personal Taste or you are just Brand Fanboy but anyways I think reasons are enough to call you dumbass.
I was having lectures that day at the track and I have video on my phone watching you drift, very very impressive!
Still would rather have the Jaguar.
Normally the Merc is the loudest out there, but this time the Jag is even louder!
Awesome review I will choose the agile Aston ;)
It is funny that Motor Trend tested the Jag and Aston and came up with the opposite conclusion that the Jag was the better car and IIRC faster and cheaper.
I really enjoyed a bit of a new format for Autocar tests. As always superb driving and opinion. Well done Mr. Sutcliffe
The brits can make engine noises like no other :D
you mean exhausts....
Does Steve has a stopwatch build into his membrane? Where is he getting these times from?!
The times might be from someone standing at the start-finish line and then radioed to Steve. I guess they edited that exchange out. Either that or the car has a built-in lap timer
The jag is faster around a dry track
Jag is faster in the dry. Motor Trend tested the Jag and Aston in the dry and the Jag was 2 seconds per lap faster, XKR-S GT is one sweet ride!
TheCarxpert link? xD i want to check that
TheCarxpert You can't just say a car is faster in the dry when these cars are so evenly matched. Some chassis' work better with certain tracks over others. For instance, the Jag might be faster around the Nurburgring for instance but the Aston might be much quicker at Hockenheim hard to tell really. Sounds like the Aston is the better car to drive and that's what is most important!
Sam Balka *****
jag would win easy on a dry track ;p
aston would be an amazing car to own
and the amg is for maximum manliness
Viking Power Depends on which track! Willow springs suits traction limited cars better so that’s probably why the Jag was quicker. I’d like to see the same event round a twisty circuit.
Oh my lord, the Jag is such a beauty! I can't get over it, it's a shame Santa didn't give me one...
This is the only Head to Head where the Aston V12 beats the XKRS-GT. Why? Probably cause Autocar always picks rainy days to test 700 NM Jaguars. On a dry country road or Autobahn this XK-GT slightly pulls away from both, as will any normal XKR-S.
that what im saying..these fucking retards pick the wet days to test powerful ass rear wheel drive cars. whats next a drag race in snow?
+smokey hahaha true bro, im sure a drag race in the snow is coming lol
357callahan No , driving in the wet is a vital part of any car test. I would rather pick the potentially slower aston if it doesn't kill me in the wet. if the aston is super quick and usable in both wet and dry so is overall the better car
357callahan Nah the regular XKRS laps considerably slower than the Aston on any big famous track except tge Nurburgring-Lamborghini syndrome?
I'll take the Aston please. On a side note, is it ever not raining or just finished raining in jolly old England? Nice review:)
Happy the Aston won although the humidity in the headlights wasn't very nice thing to see.
In a general note, you guys have great tests but I think you should try to liven up the videos. Maybe Steve should work on his voice a bit to make it more exciting for the viewer. It will make a lot of difference.
LOL, the Aston with the foggy headlights.. Good build quality there!
Half a second slower but a million times more fun and beautiful! Keep your Aston, fella and I'll keep my c63.
Far better review than MotorTrends latest Head2Head
Motortrend review was way better, they used a pro racing driver and he said the Jag was comfortably the best, I trust a professional more than a journalist...
I need that jag to stay alive hahaha love it
what????????????? motortrend compared XKR GT with VANTAGE v12 s. and said jaguar is much quicker and u r saying aston is quiker??
somebody is lying
Or simply different conditions? Motortrend tested on a dry track and also had race driver doing the testing.
lol, I was literally just thinking that. Two polar opposite reviews
Randy Pobst is an indisputable professional both as a racing driver and as a person,the XKR GT is the fastest of the three, we have no doubt who is not objective here.
Cool video, but where is the M3 GTS in this test ? Or, the most exclusive Lexus LFA Nürburgring Package !
Funny motor trend said the exact opposite with the Aston and favoring the Jag ...mmmmm I say the jags better
It says dual clutch in the C63s description, which is incorrect. It's an automatic transmission with planetry gears and a wet multi plate clutch instead of the torque converter. Only the SLS and A45 have dual clutch gearboxes at this point.
Fog in Astons headlights......quality indeed.
Kingsley, the black has been in motor trend and car and drivers top 10 drivers car competitions... And came close to winning both
How is this Steve guy allowed to set the lap times? He obviously is not a good driver, when Randy Pobst drove the Jag and the Aston for motortrend, same day, same track, same conditions (referring to the motortrend test) he got exactly reverse results. You could see Steve struggling to deal with the torque of the Jag and obviously he just is not that competent behind the wheel. When Randy Pobst is getting exact opposite results 999/1000 times you're the one that messed up, he is a world class race car driver not some writer who gets to drive on camera. What a complete sham of a test.
You know what, Steve Sutcliffe is, or at least was, a race driver. Just google the name.
Calde Ailis You should really google Randy Pobst and see how much more accomplished he is, and how much more active he remains in the race car scene.
nbrigdan I know who Randy is, he is a great driver no doubt, but apparently you didn't know what you were talking about when you said Steve "obviously is not a good driver"
Calde Ailis Comparatively speaking he is.
You got opposite results and you ended up thinking this guy must be a bad driver and couldn't make Jag run fast. Sorry, dead wrong. He is a touring car race driver too. Probably Randy is faster but that's irrelevant here. This Steve guy is apparently good enough.
If you want to know why the difference occured, you have to find the reason elsewhere.
Jaguar is beautiful full stop
I just realized this, but a rear wing on a luxury sports car is like a thong for a car, no purpose just to catch your eye.
William Seroyer lmfao!!!!!!Luxury sports cars are just plain damn ugly as hell
In other comparisons with professional racing drivers this specific Jag is 2-3 secs faster than the specific Aston. Diffirence is the dump-wet track surface and the driver. So?
Its funny how motor trend did a head to head with ths jag and the aston and had completedly different opinios. Nice one! i prefer the aston as well
Interesting that the Jaguar was quite a bit faster than the Aston on a dry track in California. Perhaps they need a racing driver to evaluate them? Oh, and some dry weather would help.
I agree, Jag is defo fastest car here
Surprised about the results.... the jag murdered the Aston with Randy at the wheel on head 2 head. Watch both videos, you be the judge, but keep in mind that Randy is a professional racing driver.
Motor trend thinks the jaguar is faster and better
Correct, Jag is quicker in the dry, probably something to do with the almost slick tyres the Jag is using.
First time I have heard the black series being called a Drivers car lol
Nothing to do with Motor Trend's opinion! And I personally trust Carlos and Randy more
hey autocar, the V12 vantage s has a 7 speed automated manual gearbox, not a 6 speed torque converter auto..
Nice early Christmas gift. :)
It is a disappointment to see that Autocar is still not uploading their video's in 1080p HD...
Why would you buy the Merc. You'd pull up at the lights glance to your left and see a Pakistani driving a taxi that just looks the same.
Motor trend lapped the xkrs GT 2 sec faster than the vantage around willow Springs on dry tarmac. Who goes to a track day when it's raining except for those who don't have the choice like the journalist & real racing drivers but the people who buy this car won't go to the track when it's raining. Useless comparison with great cars.
"people who buy this car won't go to the track when it's raining"
LOL the Brits could never have a track way then.
Calde Ailis track day*
One of each please....
How is it that Motortrend just did a comparison between the Aston and the Jag, also on a track, albeit a dry one, with a pro driver and the Jag won
A dry track makes a LOT of difference.
This is basically the exact opposite result of Motor Trend's comparison of the jag and the Aston
If you thinking of buying any of these you may want to consider the new Nissan GT-R Nismo 2014 or if you can wait even longer the new Honda NSX 2015
Maybe the fact that the Aston has a N/A engine vs supercharged engines for the Merc and the Jag, helps the Aston in slippery conditions such as those of the test here, because the power application is better modulated.
Glad it won, because the Aston is a fabulous car. The price difference relative to the Mer, which is quite ordinary next to the Aston (ordinary body, looks, interior, and V8 only) is not that important.
C63 has a NA 6.2L V8
what a shame for the aston not to have a double clutch shifting thats why Id take the benz.
That Jag really is a stunning car
the regular V12 aston costs almost half a million in australia, I don't know what the S costs. C63 AMGs are about 160k. The black series sold out but cost $240k. I'd take two black series (one for the wife) over the aston in that case.
This is pure pornography
What? Motortrend found the jag far faster, and much more planted than the Aston.
Chris Harris says hello LOL
Is that Castle Coombe
C63 is the best!
XKR-S GT is the best imo
Naah...
Black Series that is lol
C63 is a cav's super coupe, Aston Martin has class and character. Merc is loud and ridiculous
Ja'crispy Diablo dont' know you, but I prefer brutal looks and power over delicated character and class...
I would take the black series!
Not bad C63 Black Series 1/2 the price of the Aston and only a 1/2 second slower
Not to mention the C63 is more reliable!
C63= £118.000 Aston= £138000
Maths clearly not one of your strong point.
ONLYJOKING101 Actually in the US it's a different story.
ONLYJOKING101 C63 BS: 115k approx, whereas the Aston Vantage S can go near 210k.
Aston all the way for me... all awesome cars though...
Laptimes notwithstanding, all 3 of these cars are too heavy and too luxurious to be bought for trackdays. Most of the time they'll be used on the road. And that's where the Jag and the Merc will look like boy-racer tuner car version of their respective models, while the Aston will remain classy (especially without that optional carbon rear panel)!
British built quality. Look at the Astons's condensated headlights
Take the jag for the noise.
Dat AMG sound
Lets compare a couple of GT's to a compact. Yeah Mr. White, Yeah Science !
Oh really the driver of the cars doesn’t do the cars justice no test at all just his opinion and driving skills
aston also have carbon ceramic brakes
The Aston is the most badass
Jag sounds the best, Merc is better for the everyday, and the Aston is kinda in the middle. wont say anything on looks, because everyone has diffrent taste, but for me the Jag looks the best, Merc looks so dull compared to the other two.
Some people seem actually like V8 sound better than V12, which I would never understand. But that's just my opinion.
Hello Santa,I will take whichever.....!
interesting. MotorTrend had an entirely different result...
aww man, no drag race?
C63 all day just look at it an respect it
Annoying to have such opposing reviews from MT...
Merry Christmas.....
I guess Chris Harris will just have to do a review if these cars to adjudicate between Autocar and MotorTrend!?
Hmmmmmm Aston needs a new body but in power ( blue ) is it still not fit or what...... Why not put the 911 turbo s up here have two German two Brits. Why. Two vs Two
Someone's barry'd the Merc!
flying lap in the aston, you turn in too soon at quarry!!
C63 please!
this video should have instead of xkr-s gt the new f-type !!!
Jaguar F-Type R would be even better than all of these, and imagine how good an F-Type RS GT will be in the future, phewww!
why everybody says that aston looks good.... there people here that dont like it ....
but in the end this is marketing show so ... its normal :)
Chris Harris approves this video. ;)
lol mercedes looks like ordinary car there, who the fuck would chose it.
P.S.Motortrend review was more complex and Jag won there so I have no idea for what are they saying Aston is better.
I would choose it. It is an incredible car. I've seen both the C63 Black and Aston up close and I'd have to say the AMG take it easy.
Maad Dan me too
dear god..
***** You haven't experienced the C63 Raw power plus it's fun to drive :)
" I have no idea for what are they saying Aston is better." - He gives reaons at he end of the video.
The c63 black series has 517hp not 510hp
DRAG RACE ????????????
Aston cost 3 times as much as the benz, these journalist be making some crazy unrealistic comparisons
Shit stink
C63 FTW!
Yeaaah aston
IL take the amg for only a half of a second slower and 30k cheaper? And probably 10x more useful daily.
The vantage is a supercar, not a coupe
lol, no its a coupe. its a bout a foot too narrow to be a supercar.
That jag is trying too hard in terms of looks.
186 mph for the mercedes ?. Ofcourse it has a speed limit
C63 FTW
Give me a POS Aston please...
It might get old, it might sound obvious, but Range Rover wins!!!
£130,000 for the Jag!!! Wow! Really? Man, rich people got more money than sense!!!
I don't get it! These cars have been made significantly more expensive whilst being made less suitable for the road and everyday use. So therefore we have to assume that they are very expensive 'play things' with track days in mind, right? But if it was a focussed track day car you wanted why the heck would you buy one of these hijacked luxury grand tourers? Just buy Caterham or a lotus 7, then save yourself 100 grand, with that buy yourself a used Porsche 911 turbo or a GTR, what the heck you could buy both and still have enough change left over to buy a nice Merc for your daily commute! That's '4' top purpose designed car for the price of one! You know what, I think that's what I'll do. ;-)