Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 11-28-2012, 08:32 PM   #141
Rex
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 119
Bigger is better

Hi Eric.

Eric I know when anchor discussions come up someone is all ways going to spike someone with a comment, if it’s about me, I really could not care, but I will defend a customer every time.


Eric Wrote;

Rex I read some of the posts on your link. Most of the raving reviews there can be mustered for most any product.


Well Eric I suppose I am dammed if I do and dammed if I don’t. I for one have really no idea what you mean? If it’s what I think you are insinuating in this case you are totally out of line.


Eric wrote;
I'm probably the most outspoken person regarding commercialism on the forum here and even to me your link seems too much "hawk'in your wares" but I'd still like to go back to your link see if there is something to learn between the gushing raves and I think there will be. So I hope the mods leave it for a day or two ... but no more.


Well Eric you do that.
At the same time have the link removed,i never posted it there for the reason you seem to be insinuating, you know where to find it, those customers, I will defend their integrity at all cost. (many are still trailing the Excel AND MAKE POINT OF THAT) all and the ones that purchased early are convinced, they are just good honest people that are supporting an Australian product based on how our anchors perform for them.


Anchors are a passion for all boaties and when something works well for them they like to tell the world, just look at the passion oozing out of this forum.


In some cases there is more to it than that, my wife and I travel around Australia every year demonstrating our product and talking to customers at the major boat shows, Eric, we have been doing this for 15 years, that in itself builds up a reputation and relationship between our customers, when they ring Anchor Right Australia they get either myself or my wife every time.


Eric you will also notice most of the comments come from AUSTRALIA as you are aware they are not sold in the larger countries, if they were, maybe we would have similar imputes, yes I understand all forums need a watch dog to keep the bastxxxs honest but in this case you are wrong.


Fellars, I don’t need and am not desperate to sell our product into other countries, Australia NZ, TASI, keeps us absolutely flat out here,I dont need the money, my Son has other ideas.


I really enjoy conversation with you guys but I will always be an outsider, I thought I was doing a great thing by giving you that link as it is as independent real live trials as you will get rather than me spruiking its worth.


Never mind I have learnt something else.


(five to one ratio)
Please understand, you are the user and will always believe what you are doing is fine, from where I sit I am a certified anchor manufacturer that has to give the appropriate information regardless of what the conversation may be when it comes to regulative procedure’s when anchoring.


Further I believe what I say because of the proof supplied to me by the marine authorities, classification societies, I have witnessed myself why they stipulate five to one and as a result will never be convinced otherwise.

Never going to go into why as I will be 6 feet under before I can explain, convince some.


Regards Rex.

CEO Of anchor Right Australia.
__________________
Advertisement

Rex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 08:53 PM   #142
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Rex--- I'm waiting for a slow computer to render a complex effect right now so here's a long one for you.....

FWIW I have not gotten the impression you are "selling" your anchor here. Explaining its virtues, yes, and defending its design, yes. But we've all been doing that with our favorite anchor types. The only difference I see between Eric's waxing eloquently about the Dreadnought or the Forfjord or whatever anchor design has most recently caught his fancy and your comments on the Sarca line is that Eric (or I) don't manufacture the anchor we happen to be singing the praises of.

It's been interesting to read the reasoning behind the Sarca design, reasoning that is based more on reality than speculation since you had to come up with an actual product that would gain acceptance and sell in the real-world market.

Most of us have anchors as an "accessory." We do not design them, we don't make them, and with the exception of people like Carl (Delfin) who have a long history of boating and anchoring experience with a wide variety of equipment, we aren't really in a position to make comparisons based on much other than speculation, what we've read or heard, or our own very limited experience with perhaps one or two anchor types in a fairly narrow range of conditions.

So your input has been interesting, and to someone looking for a better anchor than than what they have, perhaps very useful.

So I hope that when you see an opportunity to lend your design and manufacturing experience and product user observations to a discussion on this board that you will continue to do so.

PS--- We have always treated a 5:1 scope as the minimum we will let out. If we can't anchor with at least 5:1 we will go somewhere where we can. We did not learn this from experience or designing anchors or tank tests of the behavior of all chain rode in a salt water environment on alternate Tuesdays.

We read it in a book, Earl Hinz's book to be precise, and his reasoning for the recommendation made sense so that's what we do.

It--- along with all-chain rode--- was also recommended by the Rocna folks when I first called them in New Zealand to learn something about their anchors. The instruction sheet that came with our Rocna recommends all-chain rode and a minimum scope of 5:1. (What the sheet might say today I have no idea.)

So it was useful-- as a confirmation, if nothing else, that what we've been doing all these years is a good idea--- to hear you say the same thing.
__________________

Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 11:30 PM   #143
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,707
Rex I wasn't trying to as you say "keep the bastxxxs honest". And I positively didn't insinuate anything about anybody's integrity. Nor have I ever questioned your product as everybody here knows I have an extremely high regard for your anchors.

But the writings of people raving about a product and the producer of that product putting the raves there for all of us to see on this little boat club is in my opinion a bit too commercial. The lot of us discussing engineering issues regarding the design of something as interesting as small boat anchors is delightful and I've learned as a result and had a good time. But as soon as it smacks of commercialism I'm going to get out my whistle. And I realize the people doing the raving aren't trying to sell your product and are just being honest but your presenting it here is commercial.

And before you get rilled about it you should consider that I may be the only one that feels this is commercial and that my opinion should be dismissed. Not everybody was supportive when I made an issue of brokers posting their stuff here. Most as I recall felt it was a good service to TF members. So you may want to consider my comments like water on the ducks back. But the brokers seem to have disappeared so perhaps action was taken and my directing attention to their commercialism was a benefit to the forum. I can criticize and I can take criticism but unless I'm told to shut and decease I'll always speak out against things too commercial here on the forum. Also in your support I should tell you that I think you are just barely over the top. And I'd like very much to continue to have you and your anchor design talk to remain here on the forum. A professional opinion here is very good for us. And when you want opinions from users of your products ... well this is a good place to be. And better with you included.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 02:25 AM   #144
Rex
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 119
Bigger is better

Hi Eric,

No hard feelings here my friend, every forum needs a Manyboats, colour light shade you have the lot, my side, very much buried in ones own passion, your chioce of words I think did the trick, never mind I am more the wiser for the experience.

But I cannot promise I wont light up again if the right switch is flicked.

Just had word from Joe at N.R.C. his new company are placing a substancial order in the new year only for clients within their sevices, so no fear of our little anchors creeping over your state yet unfortunately.

Distribution possiton now open.

Regards Rex.

CEO of Anchor Right Australia.
Rex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 05:23 AM   #145
TF Site Team
 
Peter B's Avatar
 
City: Brisbane
Country: Australia
Vessel Name: Lotus
Vessel Model: Clipper (CHB) 34 Sedan/Europa style
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,669
Send a message via Skype™ to Peter B
I'd like to just clarify 3 last wee points....

1. Rex, I think you misunderstood my post a bit. It was Marin who has a problem with the streamlined shape of a convex (as opposed to a concave) fluke. I don't, but possibly mucked up my explanation of why when I referred to the CQR.

2. Marin, I only referred to the CQR because it was the example you gave of a convex fluke. I have mentioned several times in other posts over time that I had one fail to set once to often, (like you with the Bruce), and replaced the CQR with a Super Sarca 8 yrs ago, and well....never looked back...and saw the boat dragging from when I planted it, ever since...

3. Eric, the posts re the testimonials regarding the Sarcas were only a link, not reproduced verbatim. You don't have to follow the link if you don't wish to, but personal testimonials are a legit comment re any product, so I think you were perhaps a little bit too sensitive re the commercialisation question - just a little, but you've sorted that out amicably now anyway, so no biggie...
Why don't you just order a Sarca # 5 from Rex and have it shipped and cover that cost by selling all (well, most of) your others....
Peter B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 10:08 AM   #146
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,707
Rex,
OK GOOD. I wasn't looking forward to going over this again today and you probably don'y have time. Because of the commercial stuff here in the past I've got a bit of a hair trigger for it.

Not good news about your distributor issue. There's probably some very good reason you don't market through West Marine or Fisheries Supply or some other big retailer. They probably look for a track record at some lower level marketing plane but it would seem you have that at home and in Europe. And most retailers probably would just see a new anchor as "just another anchor" but if people are buying ten different kinds of anchors they must see the need to have them on hand. GOOD LUCK anyway and please let us know your status here in the US as I'm sure there are at least some here that would buy your product.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 10:32 AM   #147
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,707
Peter wrote;

"3. Eric, the posts re the testimonials regarding the Sarcas were only a link, not reproduced verbatim. You don't have to follow the link if you don't wish to, but personal testimonials are a legit comment re any product, so I think you were perhaps a little bit too sensitive re the commercialisation question - just a little, but you've sorted that out amicably now anyway, so no biggie...
Why don't you just order a Sarca # 5 from Rex and have it shipped and cover that cost by selling all (well, most of) your others...."

The link is what the yacht brokers had .. even constantly in their signature. One obviously only put up a post to once again post his business link. It's a bit like the car salesman selling cars at the coffee hour after church. Just not the right time and place. But again it's just my opinion. The moderators should decide what (if any) commercialism should be here. I for one would like NONE but I'm just one. haha Or perhaps members would better make the call??? So until there's a decision I'm going to broker for no commercial stuff.

Peter I reread your #3 and agree w it completely. My hair trigger.

But Peter you told me not to buy any more anchors.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 04:31 PM   #148
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Peter-- I don't think the convex fluke of the Sarca is convex enough to make all that much difference. By "streamlined" I was referring to the CQR.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 11:34 PM   #149
Guru
 
BruceK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 7,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by manyboats View Post
I,da never thunk I'd hear those words Marin.
"I would pick the Bruce"
Nor I. But,context Eric, context. You had to be about to shoot him. People make surprising choices faced with death.
Mind you,he could have chosen the faithful CQR. I might have.The only time it let us down was not it`s fault. But I think Rex`s product will prove more forgiving.
__________________
BruceK
Island Gypsy 36 Europa "Doriana"
Sydney Australia
BruceK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 11:47 PM   #150
Master and Commander
 
markpierce's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Carquinez Coot
Vessel Model: 2011 Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,251
Walking K dock today, observed that the CQR was on eighty percent of boats over 40 feet. Some had two on their bow. Some had a CQR and a Bruce. Don't you think their owners would have changed anchors if they didn't work?
__________________
Kar-KEEN-ez Koot
markpierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 12:09 AM   #151
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by markpierce View Post
Don't you think their owners would have changed anchors if they didn't work?
I read somewhere credible that 90 percent of recreational boaters never anchor out. So it doesn't really matter what they have on their bows.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 12:26 AM   #152
Master and Commander
 
markpierce's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Carquinez Coot
Vessel Model: 2011 Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
I read somewhere credible that 90 percent of recreational boaters never anchor out. So it doesn't really matter what they have on their bows.
Is that why some have stainless steel anchors? Anchors are eye candy? No SS anchors at K dock, however, except for a Delta or two.

My neighbor has a Bruce and a CQR on his GB-42 bow (I've only a single claw on the bow), and anchors regularly. But as I said before, the sticky, heavy mud of the San Francisco estuary is kind to anchors. ... Marin, you continue to be in denial regarding people selecting anchors other than your own. Regardless, I'm glad you have an anchor you trust.
__________________
Kar-KEEN-ez Koot
markpierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 12:47 AM   #153
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by markpierce View Post
Marin, you continue to be in denial regarding people selecting anchors other than your own. Regardless, I'm glad you have an anchor you trust.
Boaters can select whatever anchor they choose. It's nothing to me. We had our original anchor fail us too many times so we went in search of a replacement that would work better and we found one. So far it's worked perfectly every time.

If someone else uses a Bruce and has good luck with it and thinks it's the greatest anchor on the planet that's fine with me. I'm not going to tell them their choice is wrong. If it fails them one too many times they'll figure that out on their own and do whatever they do to remedy the situation, just as we did. If it never fails them, well, they won't have to go in search of something better.

I've just been relaying what our experience was, why I think we had that experience, and why we would never choose that anchor for any boat of ours again. Other people's experience has no relevance to ours, just as ours has no relevance to theirs.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 05:52 AM   #154
TF Site Team
 
Peter B's Avatar
 
City: Brisbane
Country: Australia
Vessel Name: Lotus
Vessel Model: Clipper (CHB) 34 Sedan/Europa style
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,669
Send a message via Skype™ to Peter B
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
Peter-- I don't think the convex fluke of the Sarca is convex enough to make all that much difference. By "streamlined" I was referring to the CQR.
Ok, just for the fun of it, let's explore this 'streamlined' in the direction of pull, issue a bit more. Marin, I thought with your aeronautical background as well, you would have this all figured, (as relates to laminar flow over a surface), but for the sake of argument and exploring why things work, let's take the old trusty CQR as an example.
Yes, I ditched one because it failed me too often in the places I like to anchor, but as others have said, it has lasted well, not only because it sits well on a bowsprit, but because of its shape. if you get the damn thing to set - which it does really well in very soft bottoms - then it digs in well.

Why...precisely because of the 'streamlined' shape you don't like Marin. Marin, you made the comment..."Plows are designed to move through the soil, pick it up, and move it to the side. If they didn't work that way, the horse would stop."
Absolutely right. The difference being, when one refers to the plow type, as it is often called, (actually we spell it plough, but never mind), it is an approximation, is it not? Actually, a plow-share is not really like a plow anchor fluke, it is like half a plow anchor fluke. In other words a plow-share is one curved and angled blade, as if you cut a CQR fluke down the centre, and that, added to the fact the plow is supported on a frame and wheels, which stop it digging in too far, is why the horse can pull it. The soil is merely scooped and shed to one side. However, if you add the mirror image blade, thus forming the classic (plow)CQR, (and Delta, and even the S, Excel, and, although a shallower convexity, the Super Sarca, convex fluke shape), one ends up with a shape which does want to dive down and keep doing so, as long as the tip engages...thereby being the weakness, if you like, of the CQR on firmer or weedy bottoms.

If we then go back to the horse and plow, and place plow-shares on it with both sides forming the classic V shape like the flukes of the anchors above, and remove the wheels, then it would dig down very quickly to a point where no horse could move it...
In other words why that shape simply works...
My case rests.....and to give a balanced view...

Peter B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 12:12 PM   #155
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,707
Marin I think Peter man has got you good. I just didn't think about it. There are good reasons the farm plough dosn't burry itself. And an anchor that isn't streamlined will NOT penetrate the bottom or go very deep. I always thought the Claws were TOO streamlined and that was the simple explanation for their reputation to drag in soft mud. Many anchors have stocks and roll bars ect that impede progress through the bottom and do two things;
1. They resist movement and thus give a bit of holding power to the anchor.
2. They drag their very non-streamlined shapes through the bottom and prevent the anchor from penetrating deep enough to have serious holding power. And since roll bar anchors are probably tested in substrate soft enough to penetrate deep enough to have serious holding power they do well in the tests.
An anchor like the Delta, Excel and Spade don't have any appendages sticking out to get in the way of progress downward and thus, I believe, are serious penetrators with serious holding power w less size, weight and fluke area as roll bar anchors or anchors w stocks. But anchors w the shape of these three typically come up a bit short on short scope holding power in many of the anchor tests I've read. Of course if a roll bar actually does go deep in the ideal bottom the roll bar itself adds significantly to the holding power but is still not the ideal shape to make maximum holding power. So holding power of roll bars and stocks is rather low. On a Danforth (the highest holding power anchor on earth) anchors there are stocks and skids that aren't part of the flukes but they don't come into play until the flukes are buried.
So I think the ideal anchor (holding power wise) should have a short, light and streamlined shank w a large slightly concave and light fluke of great strength. It's hard to get weight out of the picture as it's so important for setting. The Oceane anchor by Spade is such an anchor but has setting problems in all the tests.
As to convex look at the Delta and the Excel. They are VERY convex. But they are both high holding power anchors. So the fact that a convex surface has more resistance is practically meaningless compared to other aspects of the anchor design. Like the 2 big flip up surfaces aft. The combination of cleanliness or slipperiness to go down being minimized and the resistance to coming up being maximized should result in the best anchor if (big if) it can dependably penetrate the bottom. W/O these two big if's these 2 anchors and the Spade are about as optimal as can be. My XYZ would even be better if one could get the attach point ideally further aft but it wouldn't set and it wouldn't come back up in the morning.

So Marin is undoubtably right that concave fluke anchors can work very very well. And the very slightly convex fluke of the SARCA is fly stuff re this issue.

I wonder what the difference in throat angle is between the Excel and the Delta?
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 03:22 PM   #156
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
I have understood the principle behind the CQR from the moment I first saw one. I know why it digs down and I know why it's supposed to "stop."

My dislike of the design compared to anchors like the spade, Bruce, Rocna, etc is that under a high load, and particularly in a less-than-firm bottom, where the other anchors "pile up stuff" in front of them which can help add to their resistance to the pull, the CQR is pointed in the direction of the pull. The angle of everything on it is aligned to move through material, not pile it up in front. It's why shovels don't have blades that look like CQR flukes.

So, if the amount of pull and the consistency of the bottom combine to defeat that "aerodynamic" principle that causes the opposed plowshare design to dig deeper, it's beautifully set up to do what the design was originated to do--- dig a nice straight furrow with the boat in the role of the horse.

Obviously this doesn't happen with great frequency or the anchor would have quickly fallen out of favor. But it can and does happen and to me the design is set up to cave and start plowing insted of piling up material in front of it and doing everything it can to resist movement. So I eliminate the risk by not having the anchor.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 03:50 PM   #157
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,707
Marin the non-burying types like my Dreadnought and the Navy anchors are quite another story. When a Navy anchor plows up a big pile of sand or whatever in front of it in a big way that pile acts like the bottom piled on top of a modern anchor and in a real way can be sort-of considered the weight of the anchor.

Burying and non-burying types are like planing and disp hulls. Way different.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 08:13 PM   #158
Rex
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 119
Bigger is better

Delta is a plough anchor, slight difference in its plowing action as to a CQR but never the less a plough, Excel, Super Sarca are not, as I have stated many times, when we design our anchors extensive research goes into their design as our anchors have been developed for a wide and variable industry.

For interest, NRC of which has been disappointing, the up side to this, the pallet of anchors they purchased from us were on trial for holding oil spillage booms, were they successful, well we have more going off to them in the New Year.

This is another example of what I mean when I say our anchor designs do not only cater for a section of the marine industry, this was very much part of the thinking during testing and development.

The link I have inserted is confronting and clearly shows the argument of concave convex and plough as in plowing design, take particular notice of the shape of the trench behind the various designs it tells you a heck of a lot.
Whether or not you think the various designs will hold better or not that is for you to debate forever.

If this is seen to be commercialization on your forum the link may be pulled. It is purley an attempt to assit you with your discussions.
If it is pulled and someone is interested you can find it on our web site UNDER ENVIROMENT DESTRUCTION.

Marin you yourself stated the makers of your design recommend five to one with all chain, again try telling this to trailer boa tie or fisherman operating in 70 meters of water, his little boat would sink with the weight, (all chain) our commercial customers who operate on the continental shelf will tell you letting out a Kilometer of rope is not uncommon.

What does your anchor designer recommend for the same applications?
Five to one is overnight anchoring I am a firm believer for reasons I have stated, it doesn’t mean you can’t anchor on less and have never said that. ( five to one is a common proven safety scope)

Regards.
Rex.

CEO of Anchor Right Australia.
Rex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 08:28 PM   #159
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex;
What does your anchor designer recommend for the same applications?
I have no idea. It's not a type of anchoring we'd ever do so it wasn't anything I had any reason to enquire about. They gave me their recommendation based on the kind of boat we had and the kind of anchoring I said we were going to be doing.

I assume that for the deep-water people they would do the same as any anchor manufacturer and either recommend a rode and ratio more suited for that type of anchoring or say nothing at all and leave it to the fisherman or boater to come up with their own solution.

Rocna seems to be aware of the fishing market--- they introduced a smaller version of their anchor with a slotted shank marketed specifically for fishermen who change locations frequently during a day of fishing and who fish over bottoms where snagging an anchor is a real possibility. It's the one application of a slotted shank that makes sense in my opinion. I don't know if they still offer this anchor as the company has changed hands a couple of times recently.

If we should find ourselves having to anchor in deeper water than we have so far we sized the 300' combination rode for our stern anchor to be the main rode for the whole boat. Actually the stern anchor itself (Fortress) is sized to be the main anchor of the boat. Its rode is kept in a box on the aft deck so we could carry it forward and shackle it onto our 200' of all-chain rode if we needed more to get the scope we wanted. So far we've not had to do this.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 08:58 PM   #160
Rex
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 119
Bigger is better

Marin wrote;

I have no idea. It's not a type of anchoring we'd ever do so it wasn't anything I had any reason to enquire about. They gave me their recommendation based on the kind of boat we had and the kind of anchoring I said we were going to be doing.

I oppolgize Marin, Ithink that was a silly question.

Regards.

Rex.

Ceo Of Anchor Right Australia.
__________________

Rex is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012