Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,656

    Larger tires (not 2.4 MutanoRaptors) that work

    In search of some tires (haven't decided on UST or not) that excel like my 2.4 MutanoRaptors for the Boise area; non-muddy riding. Anyone use the following as rear tires, and what are your thoughts?


    WTB Weirwolf 2.3
    WTB MotoRaptor 2.4
    Kenda Nevegal 2.1
    Nokian NBX 2.3
    Continental Vertical Pro 2.3 (this seems to be a great deal: http://cgi.ebay.com/2-Continental-Ve...QQcmdZViewItem)
    Continental Gravity Pro 2.3

    My priorities are weight and durability, of course; don't want some super sticky/soft tread I have to replace each month.
    Last edited by westin; 03-01-2006 at 06:22 PM.

  2. #2
    Because I am !
    Reputation: outdoornut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,307

    Kenda Nevegal Stick-E 2.5

    I have this tire on the rear of my bike. Have been running it since last July and it seems to be wearing extremely well. I do a bunch of riding in very rocky areas with lots of roots and the knobs are still in great shape. I realize our terrain is a good bit different here in WV but figure if they will hold up to these limestone mountain tops, sandstone infested singletrack and roots that can take you out in a flash, they might do well for you also. I actually thought they would wear out quicker than they are. I really think they'll make it through most of this summer unless I blow one on a drop. Have had a few flats from nasty big thorns but no pinch flats yet. I also run the Kenda Blue Groove Stick-E on the front in the same size. I really haven't been able to feel the difference between the 2.5's and my previous 2.3's. I mostly ride aggressive XC and have been working on downhill. Hope this helps..

  3. #3
    rbtm member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    891
    I've used Vertical Pro-Tection on the rear and I think it's a great tire for just about everything around here but mud. It was the biggest tire that would fit my bike I and was looking for volume to help grind through sand pits, something it does quite well. It does seem to wear a little fast but not fast enough to really bother me. I do spend some time on the road on the way to trailheads so that certainly doesn't help. Also, my tires explicitly say "Pro-Tection". The e-bay tires are missing the "Tection". I don't know exactly what those are but $20/each for the cheaper version of the tire is nothing special.
    [SIZE=1]"The mouth of justice contemplates wisdom."[/SIZE]

  4. #4
    rbtm member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    891
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Bob
    ...Also, my tires explicitly say "Pro-Tection". The e-bay tires are missing the "Tection". I don't know exactly what those are but $20/each for the cheaper version of the tire is nothing special.
    Ok, I couldn't resist a little further investigation . I was thinking of the cheap wire bead version, which the e-bay tires are obviously not. That's a good deal for the "Pro" version!
    [SIZE=1]"The mouth of justice contemplates wisdom."[/SIZE]

  5. #5
    King of the Barneys
    Reputation: CBro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,121
    Quote Originally Posted by westin
    In search of some tires (haven't decided on UST or not) that excel like my 2.4 MutanoRaptors for the Boise area; non-muddy riding. Anyone use the following as rear tires, and what are your thoughts?


    WTB Weirwolf 2.3
    WTB MotoRaptor 2.4
    Kenda Nevegal 2.1
    Nokian NBX 2.3
    Continental Vertical Pro 2.3 (this seems to be a great deal: http://cgi.ebay.com/2-Continental-Ve...QQcmdZViewItem)
    Continental Gravity Pro 2.3

    My priorities are weight and durability, of course; don't want some super sticky/soft tread I have to replace each month.

    Well, I have the 2.4 Motoraptor on the rear of my Blade, and its OK, but I think its a better front tire and may switch it with the 2.4 Nevegal. I have Kenda Kinetics 2.35 fr & rr on my SS. Love those tires. Several recommend a Nevegal fr and Blue Gr rr.

    CDB
    May your trails be narrow, crooked, lonesome and dangerous, leading to the most outrageous adventures. Paladin

  6. #6
    26er
    Reputation: smilycook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,969

    I usually buy my tires

    for non foothills riding. Generally in the foothills you want small knobs and nothing to meaty if you want to fly. But I am content with going a little slower and having a tire that works well outside of the foothills hardpack. I run kenda kinetics and the blue groves and also a nokian nbx and maxis dhf(2.5) and in the past have run the nokian gazzalodies. All of the tall knob tires will drift a little on the hard pack but they hook up real nice when the soil is not foothills hardpack.

    I hate WTB tires because they have horrible sidewalls and always seemed to rip open. That is not the case with the kendas and nokians which makes me feel much better on my long rides outside of the barney loop when I need a tire to last.
    Live to ride!

    Cannondale Jekyll Carbon 1
    Cannondale Trigger Carbon 2
    Transition Bottle Rocket
    Niner MCR 29er Hardtail

  7. #7
    Barneys Unite!
    Reputation: TFloyd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    748

    Check out the

    WTB Timberwolf 2.5. It seems to have a significantly wider footprint than other tires I've used (Serac XC's, Kenda's, etc.). I think they would be great for late in the season when the foothills trails are getting knee deep in sand.

    TF

  8. #8
    Back of the pack fat guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by westin
    In search of some tires (haven't decided on UST or not) that excel like my 2.4 MutanoRaptors for the Boise area; non-muddy riding. Anyone use the following as rear tires, and what are your thoughts?


    WTB Weirwolf 2.3
    WTB MotoRaptor 2.4
    Kenda Nevegal 2.1
    Nokian NBX 2.3
    Continental Vertical Pro 2.3 (this seems to be a great deal: http://cgi.ebay.com/2-Continental-Ve...QQcmdZViewItem)
    Continental Gravity Pro 2.3

    My priorities are weight and durability, of course; don't want some super sticky/soft tread I have to replace each month.
    I have the 2.3 Weirwolf and, unless the foothills are soft and moist, they suck in the foothills like cinnoman monkey's mother. The knobs are tall, closely packed and soft, so they squirm like the dickens on hardpack and especially when cornering. That, and it's a pretty heavy and slow rolling tire. I find it to be good in the winter in the foothills, and not bad in other Idaho areas outside the foothills (i.e., McCall) where the soil is softer, but the knobs are too tall and too soft for the hardpack in the foothills. I've been using it as the rear tire on my 1x1 this winter, but it's coming off ASAP in favor of a Mutano for the harderpack conditions that are starting to appear in the foothills.

    As for the Vertical Pro, I tried the 2.3 as a front and rear tire. First, it measures like a 2.1. It wasn't much if any bigger than the 2.1 Fire XC Pro I had it paired with. Second, it gave pretty good rear tire traction, and worked well with Stans, but when the middle knobs lose 30 - 40% of their size, the cornering traction goes to zero. I didn't like it up front due to its smallish size.

    I also have run a 2.1 Nevegal with the Stick-E compound as a rear tire. It's a bit larger volume tire than the 2.3 Vertical pro, and the knobbies are a bit shorter. However, the Stick-E compound is VERY slow rolling and it wears very quickly. That, and the center knobbies are ramped, which definitely hinders the traction if you try to climb out of the saddle. Stay away from the Kenda Stick-E compound if you want a durable tire that is fast-rolling.

    All that said, I just ordered a set of Kenda Cortezes in the 2.4 for my X-5. The Cortez has shorter knobs than the Blue Groove, and they're not ramped like the Nevegal. Also, the compound of the Cortez is Kenda's DTC (dual tread compound), so they have the L3R (fast rolling and more durable) rubber in the center for durability, with the Stick-E on the sides for cornering grip. See my post "Paging Wayndar" below. He says that the Cortez works OK in McCall, but was a very good tire for the foothills. Oh, and the claimed weight is about 700 grams (relatively light for a 2.4), and it has a beefier sidewall than the Mutano. I'm waiting on a new wheelset too, so I won't have these for a few weeks, but from what I've read and heard, they seem like they would be particularly suited for the foothills.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,656
    Quote Originally Posted by Earthpig
    I have the 2.3 Weirwolf and, unless the foothills are soft and moist, they suck in the foothills like cinnoman monkey's mother. The knobs are tall, closely packed and soft, so they squirm like the dickens on hardpack and especially when cornering. That, and it's a pretty heavy and slow rolling tire. I find it to be good in the winter in the foothills, and not bad in other Idaho areas outside the foothills (i.e., McCall) where the soil is softer, but the knobs are too tall and too soft for the hardpack in the foothills. I've been using it as the rear tire on my 1x1 this winter, but it's coming off ASAP in favor of a Mutano for the harderpack conditions that are starting to appear in the foothills.

    As for the Vertical Pro, I tried the 2.3 as a front and rear tire. First, it measures like a 2.1. It wasn't much if any bigger than the 2.1 Fire XC Pro I had it paired with. Second, it gave pretty good rear tire traction, and worked well with Stans, but when the middle knobs lose 30 - 40% of their size, the cornering traction goes to zero. I didn't like it up front due to its smallish size.

    I also have run a 2.1 Nevegal with the Stick-E compound as a rear tire. It's a bit larger volume tire than the 2.3 Vertical pro, and the knobbies are a bit shorter. However, the Stick-E compound is VERY slow rolling and it wears very quickly. That, and the center knobbies are ramped, which definitely hinders the traction if you try to climb out of the saddle. Stay away from the Kenda Stick-E compound if you want a durable tire that is fast-rolling.

    All that said, I just ordered a set of Kenda Cortezes in the 2.4 for my X-5. The Cortez has shorter knobs than the Blue Groove, and they're not ramped like the Nevegal. Also, the compound of the Cortez is Kenda's DTC (dual tread compound), so they have the L3R (fast rolling and more durable) rubber in the center for durability, with the Stick-E on the sides for cornering grip. See my post "Paging Wayndar" below. He says that the Cortez works OK in McCall, but was a very good tire for the foothills. Oh, and the claimed weight is about 700 grams (relatively light for a 2.4), and it has a beefier sidewall than the Mutano. I'm waiting on a new wheelset too, so I won't have these for a few weeks, but from what I've read and heard, they seem like they would be particularly suited for the foothills.
    Excellent! I was about to push the purchase button for the Conti Vert Pros but I need to think about it; my wheelset is not here/done either so I'm in no hurry. Would you ever run a 2.4 MutanoRaptor front and a 2.4 Cortez rear, or is the Cortez as a front just as good as the MR but with beefier sidewalls. I've run the 2.4 WTB for 2 years at 28 to 35 psi with zero sidewall, but I'm only 165 and don't bash rocks.

    I like sub-600 gram tires but I know it's all relative: true width, sidewall thickness, knobby height, and level of traction.

  10. #10
    Sheepherder/Cat Herder Moderator
    Reputation: Visicypher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,651
    Westin, supposedly WTB makes a Weirwolf with shorter knobs. You might want to look for those. As for sidewall issues on WTBs that Cook was talkin' about, I never had a problem with that in my experience. I did blow out a sidewall on a UST Conti Vert Pro w/Stan's, but that was a result of plowing into a rock at full speed. I also heard from another forum that Stan's can weaken a sidewall. You might want to look for that thread.
    ...building wherever they'll let me...

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,656
    Quote Originally Posted by Visicypher
    Westin, supposedly WTB makes a Weirwolf with shorter knobs. You might want to look for those. As for sidewall issues on WTBs that Cook was talkin' about, I never had a problem with that in my experience. I did blow out a sidewall on a UST Conti Vert Pro w/Stan's, but that was a result of plowing into a rock at full speed. I also heard from another forum that Stan's can weaken a sidewall. You might want to look for that thread.
    Thanks. I've done the whole Stan's bit, and won't be going there again. Don't want anyone thinking I'm anti-Stan's but I'm more of a regular tube/tire guy.

    Weirwolf... I'll take a look.

  12. #12
    Back of the pack fat guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by westin
    Excellent! I was about to push the purchase button for the Conti Vert Pros but I need to think about it; my wheelset is not here/done either so I'm in no hurry. Would you ever run a 2.4 MutanoRaptor front and a 2.4 Cortez rear, or is the Cortez as a front just as good as the MR but with beefier sidewalls. I've run the 2.4 WTB for 2 years at 28 to 35 psi with zero sidewall, but I'm only 165 and don't bash rocks.

    I like sub-600 gram tires but I know it's all relative: true width, sidewall thickness, knobby height, and level of traction.
    I haven't seen the 2.4 Cortez, but I'd bet it's bigger than the 2.4 Mutano (which measures more like a high-volume 2.1, per Shiggy's website), so if it were me, I'd run the Cortez up front and the Mutano in the back.

    I've had only one sidewall issue with the Mutanos in 3 years, running them on 2 bikes - one sliced sidewall on a rock over on the Redtail trail section. WTB did come out with "short knob" version of the Weirwolf in a 2.55 size, but I don't know anything about it, except it does look like it would work better for hardpack than the current Weirwolf.

    I think my ultimate tire would be a 2.4 Fire XC with knobbies the same size as those on the 2.1 Fire XC. The knobs on the 2.4 Fire FR are way too tall and huge for hardpack. Wayndar says that the Cortez is very much like what a 2.4 Fire XC would look like.

    What wheelset are you getting? I went with Hope Pro II hubs laced to DT 5.1's with 14/15 spokes.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cinnoman monkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Earthpig
    I have the 2.3 Weirwolf and, unless the foothills are soft and moist, they suck in the foothills like cinnoman monkey's mother. The knobs are tall, closely packed and soft, so they squirm like the dickens on hardpack and especially when cornering. That, and it's a pretty heavy and slow rolling tire. I find it to be good in the winter in the foothills, and not bad in other Idaho areas outside the foothills (i.e., McCall) where the soil is softer, but the knobs are too tall and too soft for the hardpack in the foothills. I've been using it as the rear tire on my 1x1 this winter, but it's coming off ASAP in favor of a Mutano for the harderpack conditions that are starting to appear in the foothills.

    As for the Vertical Pro, I tried the 2.3 as a front and rear tire. First, it measures like a 2.1. It wasn't much if any bigger than the 2.1 Fire XC Pro I had it paired with. Second, it gave pretty good rear tire traction, and worked well with Stans, but when the middle knobs lose 30 - 40% of their size, the cornering traction goes to zero. I didn't like it up front due to its smallish size.

    I also have run a 2.1 Nevegal with the Stick-E compound as a rear tire. It's a bit larger volume tire than the 2.3 Vertical pro, and the knobbies are a bit shorter. However, the Stick-E compound is VERY slow rolling and it wears very quickly. That, and the center knobbies are ramped, which definitely hinders the traction if you try to climb out of the saddle. Stay away from the Kenda Stick-E compound if you want a durable tire that is fast-rolling.

    All that said, I just ordered a set of Kenda Cortezes in the 2.4 for my X-5. The Cortez has shorter knobs than the Blue Groove, and they're not ramped like the Nevegal. Also, the compound of the Cortez is Kenda's DTC (dual tread compound), so they have the L3R (fast rolling and more durable) rubber in the center for durability, with the Stick-E on the sides for cornering grip. See my post "Paging Wayndar" below. He says that the Cortez works OK in McCall, but was a very good tire for the foothills. Oh, and the claimed weight is about 700 grams (relatively light for a 2.4), and it has a beefier sidewall than the Mutano. I'm waiting on a new wheelset too, so I won't have these for a few weeks, but from what I've read and heard, they seem like they would be particularly suited for the foothills.
    This time of year EP the trails are often soft and moist just like yo moma. I'm otta here like a fat kid in dodge ball.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,656
    Quote Originally Posted by Earthpig
    I haven't seen the 2.4 Cortez, but I'd bet it's bigger than the 2.4 Mutano (which measures more like a high-volume 2.1, per Shiggy's website), so if it were me, I'd run the Cortez up front and the Mutano in the back.

    I've had only one sidewall issue with the Mutanos in 3 years, running them on 2 bikes - one sliced sidewall on a rock over on the Redtail trail section. WTB did come out with "short knob" version of the Weirwolf in a 2.55 size, but I don't know anything about it, except it does look like it would work better for hardpack than the current Weirwolf.

    I think my ultimate tire would be a 2.4 Fire XC with knobbies the same size as those on the 2.1 Fire XC. The knobs on the 2.4 Fire FR are way too tall and huge for hardpack. Wayndar says that the Cortez is very much like what a 2.4 Fire XC would look like.

    What wheelset are you getting? I went with Hope Pro II hubs laced to DT 5.1's with 14/15 spokes.
    I've narrowed it down to DT 4.1, 14/15, alloy nips and Hope Pro II OR Mavic 717, 14/15, alloy nips and Hope Bulb.
    Where'd you get your set? Local or mailorder?

  15. #15
    Back of the pack fat guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by westin
    I've narrowed it down to DT 4.1, 14/15, alloy nips and Hope Pro II OR Mavic 717, 14/15, alloy nips and Hope Bulb.
    Where'd you get your set? Local or mailorder?
    I have an XC wheelset already (717, King rear and 717/Hope XC front), so I went with a beefier and heavier build. Not sure why you'd do a Bulb on a 717 - that's a pretty beefy hub for a pretty narrow XC-ish rim. If weight is your issue (and it looks like it's clearly one of your considerations), but you want to run a wide (2.4) tire, take a look at the Salsa Delgado rim - 29mm wide, but only 450 grams. I considered it, but because I wanted a beefier build and the wide rim, I chose the 5.1d's instead (which are closer to 500 grams apiece, but 1mm narrower).

    What frame are you putting the Pike on? Are you getting rid of your Racer X?

    As to where I bought - neither - I went with a small shop/wheelbuilder in Colorado who I've used several times in the past.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,656
    Quote Originally Posted by Earthpig
    I have an XC wheelset already (717, King rear and 717/Hope XC front), so I went with a beefier and heavier build. Not sure why you'd do a Bulb on a 717 - that's a pretty beefy hub for a pretty narrow XC-ish rim. If weight is your issue (and it looks like it's clearly one of your considerations), but you want to run a wide (2.4) tire, take a look at the Salsa Delgado rim - 29mm wide, but only 450 grams. I considered it, but because I wanted a beefier build and the wide rim, I chose the 5.1d's instead (which are closer to 500 grams apiece, but 1mm narrower).

    What frame are you putting the Pike on? Are you getting rid of your Racer X?

    As to where I bought - neither - I went with a small shop/wheelbuilder in Colorado who I've used several times in the past.
    Racer X is gone. So is the Intense Tracer. Pike is going on an Iron Horse MKIII.
    Delgado rims, huh? Looks like another 3 hours of searching for prices and info. Nice job.

  17. #17
    Back of the pack fat guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by westin
    Delgado rims, huh? Looks like another 3 hours of searching for prices and info. Nice job.
    Call Larry at mtnhighcyclery.com or I'm sure Brian could hook you up with some. The Delgados are about $20 cheaper per rim than the DT's. Nels just built up a set and they look pretty sweet - like a wiiiide XC weight rim.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Wayndar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    637
    Quote Originally Posted by Earthpig
    I think my ultimate tire would be a 2.4 Fire XC with knobbies the same size as those on the 2.1 Fire XC. The knobs on the 2.4 Fire FR are way too tall and huge for hardpack. Wayndar says that the Cortez is very much like what a 2.4 Fire XC would look like
    Hey EP, After I've been touting these tires, I really hope you like 'em. I think your description is pretty accurate- 2.4 casing with 2.1 sized knobs. Where'd you find a good price on the Cortez's? ebay? LBS? I think I'm going to find another Cortez for the rear. I'm not sure about 2.1 or 2.4- probably go with the smaller one to reduce the rotating weight.

  19. #19
    Back of the pack fat guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Wayndar
    Hey EP, After I've been touting these tires, I really hope you like 'em. I think your description is pretty accurate- 2.4 casing with 2.1 sized knobs. Where'd you find a good price on the Cortez's? ebay? LBS? I think I'm going to find another Cortez for the rear. I'm not sure about 2.1 or 2.4- probably go with the smaller one to reduce the rotating weight.
    From the descriptions I've heard, I think they will. Actually, the "2.4 casing with 2.1 knobs" is something you said before - sorry for the copyright infringement!

    Larry at Mtnhighcyclery (www.mtnhighcyclery.com) is selling the Cortez for $35. The smaller one (per Kenda's website) is a 2.2, not a 2.1

  20. #20
    Hi!!!
    Reputation: BelaySlave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,544
    Any thoughts on the 2.1 Panaracer XC Pro Mtn. tire?

    I figured I'd try to run a "faster" tire for Foothills stuff and then switch out to the Minion DH's when Brundage beckons.

    Either that or my ass just needs to get faster....

  21. #21
    Back of the pack fat guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by BelaySlave
    Any thoughts on the 2.1 Panaracer XC Pro Mtn. tire?
    The Fire XC is a nice, small volume XC tire for the foothills. Not a lot of cush or volume, but not particularly fast rolling either. If you get the 127tpi Japanese original version, I think they go about 580 grams. However, if you want a faster rolling XC tire for the foothills, and you want light weight/high volume, I'll once again recommend the Mutanoraptor.

  22. #22
    Hi!!!
    Reputation: BelaySlave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,544

    New question here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Earthpig
    However, if you want a faster rolling XC tire for the foothills, and you want light weight/high volume, I'll once again recommend the Mutanoraptor.
    http://www.wtb.com/products/tires_MutanoRaptor.html

    Would you get the 2.2 or 2.4? I'm assuming the 2.2 would be the faster of the two, but what would be the advantage of getting the 2.4 for around here? You think this would be a good Brundage tire too?

  23. #23
    Back of the pack fat guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by BelaySlave
    http://www.wtb.com/products/tires_MutanoRaptor.html

    Would you get the 2.2 or 2.4? I'm assuming the 2.2 would be the faster of the two, but what would be the advantage of getting the 2.4 for around here? You think this would be a good Brundage tire too?
    Actually, the 2.4 is the lighter and faster of the 2, oddly enough. If you check the specs closely, the 2.24 has a thicker casing and taller knobs. The 2.4's weigh about 595 grams apiece, and the 2.24 is much heavier. The 2.4's work great in the foothills because they're light, have low rolling resistance, and the small, closely-packed knobs are very predictable on the foothills hardpack and sand over hardpack. Here's the kicker - it's not a "real" 2.4 - it's more like a high volume and light weight 2.15.

    As for Brundage, no, I don't think it's a good Brundage/McCall tire - thin casing and short knobs are IMHO not a good combo for McCall's rocky and loose/deep soil riding.

  24. #24
    Sheepherder/Cat Herder Moderator
    Reputation: Visicypher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,651
    I ride my Bullit to the Ridge with Minion DHF & DHR Super Tacky. It gives you a great workout, and an excuse to have 2 milfshakes err...milkshakes...hmmm....
    ...building wherever they'll let me...

  25. #25
    Hi!!!
    Reputation: BelaySlave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,544
    Hey EP did you get the Cortez yet? If so how do you like them? I may put that on my list as well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •