Presently it stands at 25 golds, with three days of the Games to go, and almost embarrassingly they are running out of room on Big Ben. It is easily the most gold medals Great Britain have won since the 56 they snared in 1908 when they made up one-third of all competitors and well ahead of the 19 they won in Beijing.
It's an extraordinary achievement for a nation who won only one gold medal as recently as 1996 but also an illustration of what money can go a long way to buying.
Great Britain have invested £300 million, mostly through lottery money, into Olympic sports over the last four years and it's paying dividends.
Put simplistically, their 50-something medals have come at a cost of about £6 million each. It's a lot of money but they see it as a worthy investment, particularly as they have put such an onus on legacy building.
New Zealand's high performance sport bosses will soon consider the next round of funding allocations for the next four-year cycle.
They don't have such a big pot to draw from so are right to target sports they believe can deliver Olympic medals. Taking a universal approach would only water down chances in areas of genuine success but Great Britain's success must leave them wondering what they could do if they had a little more.
The hosts are almost embarrassed about their success now - not so much to pity the Australians who have seen funding slashed - but it is one of the reasons why the Olympics have been so successful.
Patriotism is not normally known as a strong trait in Anglo-Saxons, and many locals have suggested it will be extinguished along with the Olympic flame, but there's no doubt they have embraced these Olympics.
It has spurred on many athletes to unexpected success but also ensured some hometown decisions.
This was no better illustrated than when the British men's team sprint cyclists were allowed to restart their qualifying ride even though leadout rider Philip Hindes later admitted he crashed deliberately because he knew he was riding terribly.
It allowed Sir Chris Hoy to later claim a fifth Olympic gold medal to draw him level with Sir Steve Redgrave (he later surpassed him) but seemed highly irregular.
IOC bosses later said the public had not been denied a contest, almost implying the story around Hoy was more important than the rules, but they hadn't shown such latitude when a handful of badminton players attempted to lose to enhance their chances of winning a medal.
In reality, the situation was not much different because both were after the same outcome. It's all about winning and the medal table is the only thing that reflects that.
Even in today's modern world, the Olympic Games is still just a contest to find who can jump the highest, run the fastest or is the strongest.
More often than not, those are qualities money can buy and you don't just need the BBC's Big Ben to tell you that.
