Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction #2334698
07/10/17 02:09 PM
07/10/17 02:09 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,275
West Coast, USA
jbc426 Offline OP
master
jbc426  Offline OP
master

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,275
West Coast, USA
I posted on here last fall regarding a valve train instability issue that Dwayne Porter deduced was the result of valve float due to too low of spring pressure resulting from incorrect valve spring height and possibly bad valve springs while running a hydraulic roller cam.

It almost cost me a motor, but I caught the carnage beginning when I did a routine inspection and pulled the valve cover. I had blown the needle bearing cages out of all the exhaust rocker arms, bent several pushrods slightly and could see the cage material laying in my heads. I feel I was really lucky, as the car had just taken a first place in our annual Mopar Alley car show, and I had blipped it up to about 140 mph(on the track) on my way home. It was still running great, so I thought.

Under Dwayne's review of the cause of the issue, he found that this problem was already apparent on the initial dyno pull sheets, as indicated by the sudden drop in power at 5400 rpm. The motor was making 684 hp just before that drop.

I had Dwayne go completely through the heads and replace ALL the hardware and set them up for use with a solid roller. I went with the Isky red Zone bushed lifters for my street engine. Dwayne is a great man to do business with, and a true visionary in his field.

While the heads were off, Dwayne helped me spec out some custom Ross replacement pistons to reduce my compression enough to switch from race gas to pump gas. The compression drop was from 12.2 to 1 down to 10.2 to 1. The pistons came in around 514 grams. This motor has a very low reciprocating weight, and should love to rev, so I wanted to make sure I never had valve train instability problems again. I used top shelf components and took the extra step of correcting the rocker arm geometry.

I had my 1.6 to 1 T&D roller rockers rebuilt at T&D and put them on the heads. The geometry seemed way off with the roller tip reaching well above the centerline of the rocker shaft and the adjuster screw at a pretty step angle in relation to the pushrods. I still have the rebuilt set if anyone wants a deal on them.

I contacted Mike at B3 Racing and followed his instructions to get the measurements he needed to make a correction kit. As it turns out he was working on a similar project at his shop. He said in my case the geometry was so far off from ideal, that I would need to have custom rockers made by T&D. He figured out all the measurements and I had my parts a few weeks later. Mike is another great guy to do business with, and I highly recommend both men if you are locking for this type of work.

I know a lot of people on here are skeptical of this type of geometry correction, but the results speak for themselves. All you have to do to see if correcting your rocker arm geometry is worthwhile, is to look at my before and after pictures. It's such a dramatic difference, in my mind a guy would be crazy not to make this correction.

I consulted with Manton Pushrods shop foreman and upsized my pushrods to their 7/16" Stage 5 pushrods. Here is another business that provides exceptional customer service. Dwayne had increased the pushrod clearance on my heads when he had them apart and the thicker pushrods have plenty of clearance now.

I'll let the pictures of Mike's geometry correction solution do the rest of the talking on the subject of, "Is it worth taking this extra step".


Rocker before1 (Medium).JPGRockers2 (Medium).JPGRockers3 (Medium).JPG

1970 Plymouth 'Cuda #'s 440-6(block in storage)currently 493" 6 pack, Shaker, 5 speed Passon, 4.10's
1968 Plymouth Barracuda Convertible 408 Magnum EFI with 4 speed automatic overdrive, 3800 stall lock-up converter and 4.30's (closest thing to an automatic 5 speed going)
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: jbc426] #2334717
07/10/17 02:29 PM
07/10/17 02:29 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,801
S.E. Michigan
ZIPPY Offline
I Live Here
ZIPPY  Offline
I Live Here

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,801
S.E. Michigan
Thank you for that. Food for thought. Can you tell us more about the combination
In terms of design lift, ratio and so on?


Rich H.

Esse Quam Videri




Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: jbc426] #2334718
07/10/17 02:31 PM
07/10/17 02:31 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 43,007
Bend,OR USA
C
Cab_Burge Offline
I Win
Cab_Burge  Offline
I Win
C

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 43,007
Bend,OR USA
I was taught by the old Mopar drag engineer group at their drag race seminars that wedge motor single shaft rocker arms should start with the contact pattern on the valve stems to start on the inner third of the valve stem and then sweep outward across the center of the stem to the outer third at max lift, does yours do that now?
I have a set of 440-1 with a set of T&D single shaft 1.7 ratio that I haven't used yet, I have another set of them on a motor with a set of Jesel 1.55 ratio paired shaft system and the roller tips don't move much at all off the center of the valve stem at all shruggy
The other motors I've built and raced with 440-1 with Harland Sharp 1.65 ratio single shaft systems did like Mopar taught me work
I'm glad you caught those problems before it hurt the motor or you thumbs
I have broke parts on the track and thought I was going to wad up one of the race cars , thanks to God that didn't happen bow

Last edited by Cab_Burge; 07/10/17 02:32 PM.

Mr.Cab Racing and winning with Mopars since 1964. (Old F--t, Huh)
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: jbc426] #2334731
07/10/17 02:48 PM
07/10/17 02:48 PM
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,457
Washington
M
madscientist Offline
master
madscientist  Offline
master
M

Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,457
Washington
Can you post a picture of the sweep pattern. The width is what's important. It's more important than having the pattern centered.


Just because you think it won't make it true. Horsepower is KING. To dispute this is stupid. C. Alston
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: jbc426] #2334749
07/10/17 03:06 PM
07/10/17 03:06 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,479
So. Burlington, Vt.
F
fast68plymouth Offline
I Live Here
fast68plymouth  Offline
I Live Here
F

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,479
So. Burlington, Vt.
Glad to see you're finally getting it back together!! smoke


68 Satellite, 383 with stock 906’s, 3550lbs, 11.18@123
Dealer for Comp Cams/Indy Heads
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: Cab_Burge] #2334756
07/10/17 03:22 PM
07/10/17 03:22 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
B
BradH Offline
Taking time off to work on my car
BradH  Offline
Taking time off to work on my car
B

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
Originally Posted By Cab_Burge
I was taught by the old Mopar drag engineer group at their drag race seminars that wedge motor single shaft rocker arms should start with the contact pattern on the valve stems to start on the inner third of the valve stem and then sweep outward across the center of the stem to the outer third at max lift, does yours do that now?

It better not, or Mike botched his kit! haha

Two current schools of thought on rocker geometry:

1. Have the rocker arm perpendicular to the valve tip at 50% lift, which means the rocker tip starts slightly inboard of the center of the valve tip, sweeps out across the center at mid-lift, then sweeps back slightly inboard again at max lift. This approach yields a narrower overall sweep pattern and -- if components are designed properly -- will have this sweep pattern centered over the valve tip. I'm pretty sure this is the approach Mike at B3RE takes w/ his kits. Although T&D's bolt-on kits don't achieve this, this is the "ideal" geometry T&D describes in their catalog.



2. What I'll call "Jesel Geometry" (since I've seen them use this term themselves) which has the rocker arm perpendicular to the valve tip at around 2/3 max lift. Their explanation for this approach is that it reduces the amount of sweep when the valve train is under the highest spring loads, although it results in a wider sweep pattern than what I described in #1, and also puts the starting point of the sweep when the valve is closed more inboard of the valve centerline.



The image directly above shows the sweeps that result from both the Jesel "Low Pivot" approach and "Half-Lift" approach that I described in #1.

wrench

Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: jbc426] #2334879
07/10/17 07:29 PM
07/10/17 07:29 PM
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,205
New York
polyspheric Offline
master
polyspheric  Offline
master

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,205
New York
Not quite: the contact pattern on the valve stems starts on the inner third of the valve stem and then sweep outward across the center of the stem to the outer third at HALF lift, then back to its original position at FULL lift; it will be centered on the stem tip at (nearly) 25%, and again at 75% lift.
The sweep distance is greatly affected by the ratio of the long (valve-side) lever divided by the net lift at the valve: short rocker (LA) + high (.700") lift = long sweep, long rocker (hemi exhaust) + short lift (.500") = short sweep, etc. This is not an adjustment or alignment, and the cure is a different rocker and lots of work.

Mid-lift is only available if you're using Jim Miller's rockers, it's a patented feature and does not exist unless you make it yourself. Setting the valve-side geometry to 1/2 up, 1/2 down @ 90 degrees just moves the error to the pushrod side. This is frequently an improvement, but that's all you can do - bump the discrepancy back & forth across the shaft axis.


Boffin Emeritus
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: jbc426] #2334903
07/10/17 07:55 PM
07/10/17 07:55 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,314
Ohio
J
jlatessa Offline
pro stock
jlatessa  Offline
pro stock
J

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,314
Ohio
A thank you to all whose expertise is helping to clarify a complex (to me)
interaction on valve train geometry.

Many of my gaps on this subject are becoming more clear due to everyone's willingness to share their knowledge.

A complex subject and still many opinions, but if we keep at it in a civil manner and with an open mind, this too will resolve into a body of info that will benefit enthusiasts.

Thank you gentlemen!!

Joe

Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: BradH] #2334907
07/10/17 08:08 PM
07/10/17 08:08 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
A
AndyF Offline
I Win
AndyF  Offline
I Win
A

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 30,947
Oregon
I'd say the Jesel approach has been proven on countless high speed race engines in NASCAR, NHRA, etc.

The Jesel low pivot approach is also what GM Engineering recommended years ago in their GM Performance books. GM recommended setting the 90 degree point at 1/3 lift.

I did the calculations years ago to figure out the "perfect" height that would minimize the product of travel and load and it was close to the 1/3 height that GM Engineering recommended. There has been a lot of discussion lately about static loading vs. dynamic loading since once the engine is running at revs there are a lot of other things moving around.

Having said all of that I prefer to run the rockerarms the way the mfg designs them. T&D knows what they are doing and so does Jesel so I don't see any reason to mess with it. Lots of T&D and Jesel equipped engines making lots of power and staying together for lots of rounds so I don't see any reason to re-design what already works.

Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: jbc426] #2334915
07/10/17 08:33 PM
07/10/17 08:33 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,479
So. Burlington, Vt.
F
fast68plymouth Offline
I Live Here
fast68plymouth  Offline
I Live Here
F

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,479
So. Burlington, Vt.
John, have you measured the net lift at the valve, after lash, with full spring load, with the new set-up?


68 Satellite, 383 with stock 906’s, 3550lbs, 11.18@123
Dealer for Comp Cams/Indy Heads
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: jbc426] #2334955
07/10/17 09:44 PM
07/10/17 09:44 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,097
back in Georgia
dthemi Offline
master
dthemi  Offline
master

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,097
back in Georgia
Well, what they hey I'll chime in too. For me, us, we, we like to start with the shortest valve that can exist in the range of .05, or sometimes less before coil bind for the given lift. Idea being keeping all things as short as possible. Rocker shafts close to their anchors in the head, and less deflection, and weight. Personally I like to start the motion from the back of center of the valve, shooting for the shortest sweep available, even if it's off center. That's just me, so do what works for ya.

Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: polyspheric] #2334997
07/10/17 10:35 PM
07/10/17 10:35 PM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,309
Prospect, PA
BSB67 Offline
master
BSB67  Offline
master

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,309
Prospect, PA
Originally Posted By polyspheric
Not quite: the contact pattern on the valve stems starts on the inner third of the valve stem and then sweep outward across the center of the stem to the outer third at HALF lift, then back to its original position at FULL lift; it will be centered on the stem tip at (nearly) 25%, and again at 75% lift.
The sweep distance is greatly affected by the ratio of the long (valve-side) lever divided by the net lift at the valve: short rocker (LA) + high (.700") lift = long sweep, long rocker (hemi exhaust) + short lift (.500") = short sweep, etc. This is not an adjustment or alignment, and the cure is a different rocker and lots of work.

Mid-lift is only available if you're using Jim Miller's rockers, it's a patented feature and does not exist unless you make it yourself. Setting the valve-side geometry to 1/2 up, 1/2 down @ 90 degrees just moves the error to the pushrod side. This is frequently an improvement, but that's all you can do - bump the discrepancy back & forth across the shaft axis.


No one ever talks about the other half of the rocker arm geometry, as if it does not exist. Maybe it's un-important, although there seems to be no shortage of issue/failures on that side.

Although I'll probably give Mike a call the next time I do some rockers, I'm kinda with Andy on this one. For at least 40 years engineers in both auto manufacturing and aftermarket have been messing specifically with this topic to achieve different results for specific reasons. At the end of the day, my junk would never know the difference.

Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: fast68plymouth] #2335019
07/10/17 11:06 PM
07/10/17 11:06 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,289
Tucson AZ,
M
MadMopars Offline
pro stock
MadMopars  Offline
pro stock
M

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,289
Tucson AZ,
Originally Posted By fast68plymouth
John, have you measured the net lift at the valve, after lash, with full spring load, with the new set-up?


What he said... up


[img]https://s9.postimg.cc/6fbjxzfvv/48-2016-_Drag-_Weekend-_Best-_Burnouts-lpr.jpg[/img]


73 GTX *440*727*8 3/4*
69 DART GT *440*4 SPEED*DANA*
73 ROAD RUNNER *451*4 SPEED*DANA*
64 F100 *383*4 SPEED*9"*
75 DODGE D300 *440*4 SPEED*DANA*
99 DODGE RAM 3500 4X4 DUALLY... ON 38"s
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: fast68plymouth] #2335139
07/11/17 02:19 AM
07/11/17 02:19 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 43,007
Bend,OR USA
C
Cab_Burge Offline
I Win
Cab_Burge  Offline
I Win
C

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 43,007
Bend,OR USA
Originally Posted By fast68plymouth
John, have you measured the net lift at the valve, after lash, with full spring load, with the new set-up?

I have a customer and friend who teaches the H.P. course at one of the SO CA ITT or UTI auto tech. schools (CRS whiney) who broke a valve in one of the motors I built for his 1968 dart BB drag car, he is putting it back together himself now and calls me when ever he has a question. He has found thing I missed , crank snout had .0015 run out at the timing gear and he saw the timing change tension vary from that difference thumbs
He is a book reader and cautious on some of the clearances, (he worked over twenty years in one of the SO CA Jaguar dealership before starting teaching, he has had the ASE master tech rating since day one) he was concerned with .060 intake valve to piston clearance and .085 clearance on the exhaust side with checking springs using a dial indicator on the retainer aligned with the valve stem angles front to rear and straight up and down. He clayed it also and saw some variance between the two ways so he called. I ask him to put the roller cam springs in ands redo the clay, it picked up over .020 more clearance thumbs
He is happy and worry free now boogie grin
When in doubt, check it out scope

Last edited by Cab_Burge; 07/11/17 02:21 AM.

Mr.Cab Racing and winning with Mopars since 1964. (Old F--t, Huh)
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: Cab_Burge] #2335188
07/11/17 09:59 AM
07/11/17 09:59 AM
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,825
NW Indiana
F
fbs63 Offline
top fuel
fbs63  Offline
top fuel
F

Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,825
NW Indiana
No way would I be confident with the shaft raised that far off the original pedestal and off center. If you want to correct it that much machine the mounts on the head flat and machine new mounting stands.

Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: Cab_Burge] #2335196
07/11/17 10:18 AM
07/11/17 10:18 AM
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 561
USA
B
B3RE Offline
mopar
B3RE  Offline
mopar
B

Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 561
USA
Originally Posted By Cab_Burge
I was taught by the old Mopar drag engineer group at their drag race seminars that wedge motor single shaft rocker arms should start with the contact pattern on the valve stems to start on the inner third of the valve stem and then sweep outward across the center of the stem to the outer third at max lift, does yours do that now?


Forgive me for the lack of multi quotes, but I just want to clear up a few things.

Cab, the factory engineers were talking about non roller type rockers. They are supposed to be set up the way you described, but a roller will have a bunch of velocity at full lift when set up that way, and be very unstable. The rocker is supposed to transmit the cams lobe information as accurately as possible everywhere, not just full lift. It can't do that if the valvetrain is that far off.


Mike Beachel

I didn't write the rules of math nor create the laws of physics, I am just bound by them.
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: BradH] #2335200
07/11/17 10:33 AM
07/11/17 10:33 AM
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 561
USA
B
B3RE Offline
mopar
B3RE  Offline
mopar
B

Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 561
USA
Originally Posted By BradH
Originally Posted By Cab_Burge
I was taught by the old Mopar drag engineer group at their drag race seminars that wedge motor single shaft rocker arms should start with the contact pattern on the valve stems to start on the inner third of the valve stem and then sweep outward across the center of the stem to the outer third at max lift, does yours do that now?

It better not, or Mike botched his kit! haha

Two current schools of thought on rocker geometry:

1. Have the rocker arm perpendicular to the valve tip at 50% lift, which means the rocker tip starts slightly inboard of the center of the valve tip, sweeps out across the center at mid-lift, then sweeps back slightly inboard again at max lift. This approach yields a narrower overall sweep pattern and -- if components are designed properly -- will have this sweep pattern centered over the valve tip. I'm pretty sure this is the approach Mike at B3RE takes w/ his kits. Although T&D's bolt-on kits don't achieve this, this is the "ideal" geometry T&D describes in their catalog.


Brad,

Once again, you are spot on. The reason the T&D rockers (or Jesel)don't achieve perfect geometry with the single shaft, is because they can't. They make a compromised rocker, for the guys who want to just bolt something to the existing stands, just like everyone else. I've talked with their engineer multiple times, and he admits that is true. But, they will tell you, "we have a paired system that has correct geometry". Yes, but you will have to use pushrod or spray bar oiling, likely have to bush the lifter bores with the pushrod oiling, cut off the stands on the heads, and class racers like Stock Eliminator aren't allowed to do that.

The Jesel set up may center the roller at the highest spring pressure, but does not decelerate the valve as much at full lift, or accurately transmit the cam lobe to the valve. So, what is more important, loading on the valve tip, or stability and accuracy?


Mike Beachel

I didn't write the rules of math nor create the laws of physics, I am just bound by them.
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: polyspheric] #2335201
07/11/17 10:39 AM
07/11/17 10:39 AM
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 561
USA
B
B3RE Offline
mopar
B3RE  Offline
mopar
B

Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 561
USA
Originally Posted By polyspheric


Mid-lift is only available if you're using Jim Miller's rockers, it's a patented feature and does not exist unless you make it yourself. Setting the valve-side geometry to 1/2 up, 1/2 down @ 90 degrees just moves the error to the pushrod side. This is frequently an improvement, but that's all you can do - bump the discrepancy back & forth across the shaft axis.


We've talked about this before. Jim Miller's patent does not go on in perpetuity. It expired in 1994, and anyone who wishes to design a rocker with that concept, is free to do so. I have expanded on that concept, and that is what John (OP) has posted here. You are correct, though, that you won't find an off the shelf, single shaft rocker with the proper design.


Mike Beachel

I didn't write the rules of math nor create the laws of physics, I am just bound by them.
Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: jbc426] #2335202
07/11/17 10:40 AM
07/11/17 10:40 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,289
NE Ohio
DoubleD Offline
top fuel
DoubleD  Offline
top fuel

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,289
NE Ohio
Nothing new here - this method of raising the shafts up using an offset cam insert was tried more than thirty + years ago - you will eventually find that you will either pull or snap the studs out of the stands or push the whole shaft over - the more spring pressure the more the design flaw will begin to show. The solution thirty years ago was to machine the pads and make new blocks that were located and pinned to the head - yes it was pricey but it worked with lifts approaching .900. On a mild - low lift motor this method probably works fine - its an age old argument with a single shaft valve train as to rocker path - but there are many engines running T&D, Jesel, HS that are performing just fine. Its just a matter of personal choice

Re: B3 Racings's Indy EZ's & T&D rocker arm geometry correction [Re: AndyF] #2335218
07/11/17 11:09 AM
07/11/17 11:09 AM
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 561
USA
B
B3RE Offline
mopar
B3RE  Offline
mopar
B

Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 561
USA
Originally Posted By AndyF
I'd say the Jesel approach has been proven on countless high speed race engines in NASCAR, NHRA, etc.

The Jesel low pivot approach is also what GM Engineering recommended years ago in their GM Performance books. GM recommended setting the 90 degree point at 1/3 lift.

I did the calculations years ago to figure out the "perfect" height that would minimize the product of travel and load and it was close to the 1/3 height that GM Engineering recommended. There has been a lot of discussion lately about static loading vs. dynamic loading since once the engine is running at revs there are a lot of other things moving around.

Having said all of that I prefer to run the rockerarms the way the mfg designs them. T&D knows what they are doing and so does Jesel so I don't see any reason to mess with it. Lots of T&D and Jesel equipped engines making lots of power and staying together for lots of rounds so I don't see any reason to re-design what already works.


I learned most of what I know about rocker geometry and valvetrains from a Gibbs camshaft and valvetrain specialist in their engine department. They might use Jesel rocker arms, but they don't set them up they way Jesel recommends. In fact, many teams now make their own valvetrain parts in house.

I have a Late Model dirt track motor in the shop right now, that was built elsewhere. It ate an exhaust valve, and was using Jesel paired rockers set up the way Jesel recommends. The crew chief said the only failures they have experienced are all valvetrain related. With a flat tappet cam rule, these guys can't keep loading the motor up with spring pressure to mask the problem. It has to be right, and obviously it isn't.

I spent about a half hour on the phone with Larry Torres two weeks ago, discussing rocker geometry. He is well aware of the problems with geometry on Mopar single shaft systems, and the compromises made to give the market what they ask for, a rocker that can be "just bolted on". It doesn't make it right, but no one wants to believe that they will have to spend big bucks for rockers, and then have to modify things to set them up properly. Especially when they can read a book that will give them bad information, and make them feel better about their pain when they have problems. An opioid for the Mopar masses.


Mike Beachel

I didn't write the rules of math nor create the laws of physics, I am just bound by them.
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3






Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1