So I "praised" ATP's program? I somehow remember I said it's not the best program because it tries to teach things much too quick and the standards are sometimes poor. I was discussing an unrealistic expectation of costs, not including ground time, etc.

Yes, it's my opinion that a private checkride can not be done in a 1.3. You have to be evaluated starting up, checking the guages, asked a few questions, getting weather, taxiing out, making turns, answering a few questions about the airport signs and markings, getting prepared to fly your cross country in the run-up, getting set up, entering frequencies, opening the flight plan, doing the runup, actually checking rather than just using rote-procedures as fast as possible, maybe answer a few more questions, then do a short or soft field takeoff, and if not, a full stop or stop-and go later where that can be properly evaluated, and that stop and go could be combined with a remaining takeoff for efficiency obviously. Then you're simulating the XC, and it has to go far enough for the examiner to be certain that you are able to navigate properly and by reference to the ground. This means at least a couple checkpoints, in addition, doing the aircraft's cruise checklist and knowing how to lean the mixture for cruise. There's also radar services and communications to be evaluated in cruise. Clearing the airport, making it up to cruise, leaning the mixture, and flying to a few checkpoints is going to at least take the better part of half an hour. If not, it's not really being evaluated. It doesn't need to go on excessively, but it does need to go on to the point where it can be realistically evaluated. Then you do a diversion, which depending on the examiner, could be to a nearby point or dirt strip (unrealistic IMO, but I digress) or to a point at which you'd actually land for a non-emergency, which could even be "over the horizon". I'd usually choose the latter, but it wouldn't take but 10 minutes or so if one was diligent and quick, but it'd take at least that long to run the calcs, point the aircraft and start going, make all the necessary calls, plans and changes, maintain control, and provide verification/answer questions on the route so I'm certain you'd get there. Then it's on to maneuvers, like steep turns, stalls, slow flight, emergencies, emergency approach and landing, ground reference maneuvers, all of which take time to set up, especially with clearing turns and being safe. At some point you have to do "hood work" and a few tasks, like turns, or climbs, and also unusual attitudes. Then it's back to the airport to finish up landings (I always give the option of doing the landings first if someone wants though, before heading out), of which there are at least 4 that have to be demonstrated to the best of my knowledge without looking at the PTS, normal, short, soft, fwd-slip. If in some way the fwd-slip is combined (shouldn't be combined with normal for sure) you still have to do a go-around on one approach anyway, and there's the other takeoff that needs to be done. Maybe even a no-flap landing in addition to the ones above if all abnormals aren't completed yet.

This isn't meant to be "drawn out" as long as possible, but it is meant to be a fair test and thoroughly evaluated. There are things that examiners do to make it more efficient, but it's not going to cut a private checkride down to 1.3, and if it does, red flags should be going off for those that know about it. 1.3 might be realistic for a best-case scenario added rating on a good day, but for a private? Like I said, red flags. I'm not saying you shouldn't be a pilot, hopefully you'll get enough training and experience that there isn't any difference later on, but again, 1.3 is a red flag, as is doing the cert as fast as possible, which misses out on things you'd experience over a longer period of time, at least if we are talking about 19 days.

Just my opinion though...