| Place | Result | Name | Quote | Date |
|---|
| 1 | 11.25 seconds | Mackenzie Blake | one of my fastest times. i am very happy with this! | 20080403 |
| 2 | 12.62 seconds | Emile Compion | I wanted to make a video that showed what one of my average solves looked like but wound up getting my personal best. Check out the video. | 20061005 |
| 3 | 15.75 seconds | Derrick Eide | Damn this was too easy lol. Didn't seem that fast actually. weird. | 20070815 |
| 4 | 23 seconds | Sam Philzie | Not lucky at all. Well, my UFO was co operating so I suppose you could call that lucky!!
i hope to get all my solves this fast. | 20070312 |
| 5 | 24.27 seconds | Richard Patterson | Technically 'not lucky', but just about as fluid as it could get w/ no parity. The parity typically costs me over 10 seconds, because my alg for solving this case is horrible. Sub-20 solves may be possible with a better puzzle and more algs. | 20050404 |
| 6 | 33.79 seconds | Joshua Woelmer | fairly easy now that i know all the algorithms. Now my first layer has to get better, i need a better ufo, and I'm set to get better times. This one was particularly easy, but no skips (do ufos have skips?) | 20070324 |
| 7 | 37.19 seconds | Zebadiah W. Ziegenbein | this was very very fast. The bottom only took one move to solve. this will by far stay the best for awhile. | 20060311 |
| 8 | 45.06 seconds | Michael Gottlieb | Not lucky. I use a layer-by-layer method. I can do much better with a bit more practice. | 20070119 |
| 9 | 49.58 seconds | Joe Wallace | I cant turn my UFO very good | 20060516 |
| 10 | 1 minute 8.04 seconds | Jeff Soesbe | working on getting closer to a minute | 20050529 |
| 11 | 1 minute 11 seconds | Will Klausler | I hate parity | 20090308 |
| 12 | 3 minutes 39.83 seconds | Patrick Devane | I really screwed up on that one. I'm trying to set as many times as I can before my 13th 2 days away. | 20081127 |
