Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nickgto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    785

    Sin or San Andreas DNA for AM ?

    I came across an awesome deal on a San Andreas DNA frame and have decided to expand my MC stable to 3 bikes. The Shockwave is definitely for DH but I can't decide which of the two bikes I would build for FR and which one for AM. My Sin currently has my FR parts namely 170mm 66 fork, Saint Drivetrain, Mono6 Ti brakes, Deetraks wheelset; and sits at 38 lbs. My AM build would have 150mm Z1 fork, LX Drivetrain, HFX 9 brakes, Deetraks wheelset. My Target weight is around 34 lbs.

    The DNA came with a 7.875 x 2.25 Manitou 4 way coil giving 7 to 7.75 inches of travel while the Sin came with 7.875 x 2.25 Progressive 5 way coil but has the relaxed shock cleat thus lowering the travel to only 6.7 inches.

    Which would you rather build for AM and which one for FR?
    DH:Mountain Cycle Shockwave 9.5 w/ 888R
    FR:Marin Quake w/ 888RC
    AM:BMC Superstroke 01 w/ 66RC2X

  2. #2
    Hmmmmm
    Reputation: Ericmopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,753
    Well... The San Andreas DNA is no longer in production, although MC did order some frames for warranty use.
    The Sin has been reclassified as AM and light Freeride.
    That of course is all relative, what they call "light" Freeride was pretty knarly just a few years ago.
    When I asked Krien about reclassifying the San Andreas' as All Mountain bikes, he agreed and said it would put the classification of the old San Ans more in line with the new San Ans (v.4, v.5) that are coming out.
    I have since, had MTBR, reclassify the San An Classic and DNA as All Mountain Bikes in the reviews.

    Hint, Hint, Hint.

    I think the new V.4 and V.5 San Ans are intended to be, bad ass bikes.
    If I were you, I'd stick with the Sin for now and see what comes out in a few months.
    I'm curious though to see what Tim and the others have to say on this.

    Later, Eric.
    "I thought of that while riding my bike."
    Albert Einstein, on the theory of relativity.

    Peace and Long Rides...

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nickgto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    785
    I was just prepared to spend for a Rumble frame for $200 but the same amount for a San Andeas DNA is just too hard to let pass considering it's in good condition & all pewter color.

    The 2005.mountaincycle.com has the Sin set-up for FR while the DNA was set up for AM. However the Sin was classified for 30% AM, Full FR, 30% DH, while the DNA was 30% XC, 100% AM, 100% FR, 30% DH. The DNA overlaps the Sin's category of use but could still do some XC.

    Visually, the Sin looks burlier than the DNA but I was informed by Tim via Email that the strenght of both frames are the same. He did tell me that the San Andreas is long & low cockpit feel while the Sin has a short & tall cockpit feel. With these inputs in mind, it seems that the Sin would be better for FR due to it's flickability while the DNA for AM due to it's streched feel for climbing.
    DH:Mountain Cycle Shockwave 9.5 w/ 888R
    FR:Marin Quake w/ 888RC
    AM:BMC Superstroke 01 w/ 66RC2X

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mcrumble69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,058
    I dont really have an answer for you but I saw your question and it's very interesting.
    I decided to browse through a MC owners manual and heres my opinion.
    Because of the adjustable Cockpit,BB,HA of the DNA it seems like it might be better suited for you as a AM bike.
    You would have the ability to set it up how it feels best on your local trails.
    Also You can use different length shocks to adjust the travel.
    2in stroke for 6 - 6.75in and 2.25 for 7 - 7.75in.

    Unfortunately the manual doesn't have the geometry #'s but I think If you could find a 2in stroke shock it would make an ideal All Mountain bike.
    If it can take a 7.5x2.0 shock I can think of someone who might have one for sale. "cough" Eric Mopar "cough"

    Hope this helps
    One Of The Other Eric's...

    BTW: Where did you find this deal? If you don't want it I might...

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nickgto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    785
    I wonder why MC decided to drop both the DNA and the Sin? Were they really that bad?

    In their current lineup, there is a big travel gap between the Shockwave and the Fury. I know they are redesigning the San Andreas to fill in the gap. Wouldn't it be better if they could've kept at least one of those models to temporarily bridge the gap while waiting for the new design?
    DH:Mountain Cycle Shockwave 9.5 w/ 888R
    FR:Marin Quake w/ 888RC
    AM:BMC Superstroke 01 w/ 66RC2X

  6. #6
    Hmmmmm
    Reputation: Ericmopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,753
    Well, they have kept the San An Classic. I could be wrong because I haven't been bike shopping for awhile, but I think DNA frames are still available through mail order. The DNA is not a bad bike at all, it just didn't sell well for some strange reason. It got great reviews in the bike rags, but MC was in transition during part of the DNA's life and I think the "where did MC go?" thing, might have hurt the DNA's sales numbers.
    My sales catalog shows the DNA as long travel trail, but I know it is capable of some freeriding.
    The reviews on the Sin, show that people think it climbs pretty good.
    At this point, I'd be waiting for the new rides.
    I think Eric C has a point though, the DNA is adjustable for more than one kind of riding. It's a little more flexible than the Sin as far as setup goes.
    It is a tough choice. Use the Force Nick, Use the Force...
    "I thought of that while riding my bike."
    Albert Einstein, on the theory of relativity.

    Peace and Long Rides...

  7. #7
    Hmmmmm
    Reputation: Ericmopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,753
    Oh yea, I almost forgot.
    I think by definition, All Mountain is a light freeride, XC / trail bike.
    "I thought of that while riding my bike."
    Albert Einstein, on the theory of relativity.

    Peace and Long Rides...

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mcrumble69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Ericmopar
    Oh yea, I almost forgot.
    I think by definition, All Mountain is a light freeride, XC / trail bike.
    Yep...Basically a bike you can ride the whole mountain on..But then again I can remember doing that on my fully rigid Giant in the 80's

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    559
    Buy the Rumble!! I would not consider any serious FR on the DNA or Sin. I would wait and see what's coming out. *hint 7 rides like this..........
    Attached Images Attached Images

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nickgto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by MC9.5
    Buy the Rumble!! I would not consider any serious FR on the DNA or Sin. I would wait and see what's coming out. *hint 7 rides like this..........
    That is one awesome drop on the DNA! That looks serious enough FR drop though!

    MC 9.5, your DNA is the baddest lookin in DNA in this board! Do you use it for AM? Did it still climb with the Shiver? Is the frame still in one piece?

    The reason why I asked is because my friend is interested in buying my Z1 and my he suggested to put a 170-180mm DC fork to match up with the 7-7.75 inch rear travel provided by the DNA's rear shock.

    I could also do the other route and get a shorter rear shock (7.5 x 2.0) in or to just get 6-6.75 inches and still pair it with the Z1.

    The way it's turning out, I might just build it as a back-up bike to the Sin which means similar build specs. Right now I'm still undecided as how I'm gonna proceed.
    Last edited by nickgto; 02-15-2008 at 09:45 AM.
    DH:Mountain Cycle Shockwave 9.5 w/ 888R
    FR:Marin Quake w/ 888RC
    AM:BMC Superstroke 01 w/ 66RC2X

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,479
    Quote Originally Posted by nickgto
    That is one awesome drop on the DNA! That looks serious enough FR drop though!

    MC 9.5, your DNA is the baddest lookin in DNA in this board! Do you use it for AM? Did it still climb with the Shiver? Is the frame still in one piece?

    The reason why I asked is because my friend is interested in buying my Z1 and my he suggested to put a 170-180mm DC fork to match up with the 7-7.75 inch rear travel provided by the DNA's rear shock.

    I could also do the other route and get a shorter rear shock (7.5 x 2.0) in or to just get 6-6.75 inches and still pair it with the Z1.

    The way it's turning out, I might just build it as a back-up bike to the Sin which means similar build specs. Right now I'm still undecided as how I'm gonna proceed.
    Nope.

    I like the DNA geometryand lay-out better than the Sin. Both front ends seem to be about equal strength. The Sin's swingarm is just as strong as the 9.5's. DNA has a lower BB and lower seat, but a really long swingarm. Sin is IMO too short a top tube, too tall a seat tube, too steep a HA.

    Mountain Cycle has new frames in development that will be freeride type bikes that are intended to be hucked and hold up to abuse. I can't say for sure which one's will actually go into production and which one's will be scrapped. There is a new 5" and 7" FR, and also new AM, XC and hardtail bikes. I don't think I can say any more than that.

    I'm sad to say that neither the Sin or DNA have proven able to tolerate much hard riding. Everybody likes really light bikes, but it's tough to design a light frame that is also strong. I used to use a Zen for freeride when I worked full time for MC. I'd just grab another frame or swingarm when needed.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by nickgto
    That is one awesome drop on the DNA! That looks serious enough FR drop though!

    MC 9.5, your DNA is the baddest lookin in DNA in this board! Do you use it for AM? Did it still climb with the Shiver? Is the frame still in one piece?

    The reason why I asked is because my friend is interested in buying my Z1 and my he suggested to put a 170-180mm DC fork to match up with the 7-7.75 inch rear travel provided by the DNA's rear shock.

    I could also do the other route and get a shorter rear shock (7.5 x 2.0) in or to just get 6-6.75 inches and still pair it with the Z1.

    The way it's turning out, I might just build it as a back-up bike to the Sin which means similar build specs. Right now I'm still undecided as how I'm gonna proceed.
    A couple of questions and thoughts:

    It sounds like you already bought the DNA?

    How much do you weigh?

    Thanks for the compliment. I loved this bike!! I used it once for AM with the Shiver and it was a wheelie machine on the uphills. Otherwise fun as hell

    I WOULD NOT recommend putting a dual crown fork on the DNA or using it as pictured above!!! Technically speaking, it is still in one piece, but it's no longer in use *hint*...... I should have listened to Twisted!! No need for you to make the same mistake.

    I would however recommend putting your Z1 fork on w/the shorter rear shock and ride the wheels off of it (STRICTLY XC/AM ONLY!!!!!). I think this is your best option.

    I hope this helps.

    Dave
    Last edited by MC9.5; 02-15-2008 at 11:15 AM.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nickgto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    785
    Thanks for the inputs Dave. My riding weight with gear is around 225 lbs. I'm about to pick up the frame this weekend if everthing works out.
    DH:Mountain Cycle Shockwave 9.5 w/ 888R
    FR:Marin Quake w/ 888RC
    AM:BMC Superstroke 01 w/ 66RC2X

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by nickgto
    Thanks for the inputs Dave. My riding weight with gear is around 225 lbs. I'm about to pick up the frame this weekend if everthing works out.
    No problem. I am about 205lbs without gear. Good luck with the DNA, I am sure you will like it..... Just take it easy!!!

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nickgto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    785
    I got the DNA frame last Saturday. It's in awesome condition, as there are only some light scratches from rear tire kincks and one at the swingram / shock mount location possibly caused by the seatpost. I might have to purchase a heavier spring because it only came with a 500 lbs spring. http://www.tftunedshox.com/springcalc.htm recommended that I put a 600 lbs spring if I'm gonna use it at 7.7inch setting. Which leads me to my question as to which of the two swing arm shock mounts provide that travel?

    I also picked up an '05 170mm Sherman Slider Plus in Camo for a cheap $100 while I sold my '05 Zoke Z1FR3 150mm for $150 to my friend. I know it's a DC fork which might compromise the frame, but I plan to install the fork stop from my Shockwave just in case. I did notice that the Sherman's AC height is about the same as the Z1 so the HA would still be acceptable for climbing. I also noticed that the Slider has the same adjustments as the Swinger 4 Way namely SPV pressure & volume as well as rebound. I haven't installed it yet but I did observe that the rebound range of the Slider isn't as wide as the 66 rc2x. I wonder if adding SPV pressure and turning in the SPV volume would have any effect on the rebound speed.

    The Slider's color is dark gray / gray / white Camo which is visually more compatible with my White / Pewter Sin, but am a bit hesitant to pair it with the Sin due to the fact that the Slider's lower AC height would steepen the HA of the Sin by at least 1 degree.

    I'm currently buying parts for slowly building the DNA. It's gonna be geared more towards easier / less technical rides, but it's available 7.7 inch option is just tempting enough to build it more aggresively because it eclipses the Sin's 6.7 inch travel due to the relaxed shock cleat.
    DH:Mountain Cycle Shockwave 9.5 w/ 888R
    FR:Marin Quake w/ 888RC
    AM:BMC Superstroke 01 w/ 66RC2X

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,479
    Quote Originally Posted by nickgto
    I got the DNA frame last Saturday. It's in awesome condition, as there are only some light scratches from rear tire kincks and one at the swingram / shock mount location possibly caused by the seatpost. I might have to purchase a heavier spring because it only came with a 500 lbs spring. http://www.tftunedshox.com/springcalc.htm recommended that I put a 600 lbs spring if I'm gonna use it at 7.7inch setting. Which leads me to my question as to which of the two swing arm shock mounts provide that travel?

    I also picked up an '05 170mm Sherman Slider Plus in Camo for a cheap $100 while I sold my '05 Zoke Z1FR3 150mm for $150 to my friend. I know it's a DC fork which might compromise the frame, but I plan to install the fork stop from my Shockwave just in case. I did notice that the Sherman's AC height is about the same as the Z1 so the HA would still be acceptable for climbing. I also noticed that the Slider has the same adjustments as the Swinger 4 Way namely SPV pressure & volume as well as rebound. I haven't installed it yet but I did observe that the rebound range of the Slider isn't as wide as the 66 rc2x. I wonder if adding SPV pressure and turning in the SPV volume would have any effect on the rebound speed.

    The Slider's color is dark gray / gray / white Camo which is visually more compatible with my White / Pewter Sin, but am a bit hesitant to pair it with the Sin due to the fact that the Slider's lower AC height would steepen the HA of the Sin by at least 1 degree.

    I'm currently buying parts for slowly building the DNA. It's gonna be geared more towards easier / less technical rides, but it's available 7.7 inch option is just tempting enough to build it more aggresively because it eclipses the Sin's 6.7 inch travel due to the relaxed shock cleat.
    The lower/closer mount will give you the longer travel and higher leverage ratio. You must have the longer 7.875" x 2.25" shock to get the 7.75" rear travel.

    Be careful about pushing the bike too hard.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by nickgto
    just tempting enough to build it more aggresively because it eclipses the Sin's 6.7 inch travel due to the relaxed shock cleat.
    Check your PM's

  18. #18
    Hmmmmm
    Reputation: Ericmopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,753
    Quote Originally Posted by nickgto
    I also picked up an '05 170mm Sherman Slider Plus in Camo for a cheap $100 while I sold my '05 Zoke Z1FR3 150mm for $150 to my friend. I know it's a DC fork which might compromise the frame, but I plan to install the fork stop from my Shockwave just in case. I did notice that the Sherman's AC height is about the same as the Z1 so the HA would still be acceptable for climbing. I also noticed that the Slider has the same adjustments as the Swinger 4 Way namely SPV pressure & volume as well as rebound. I haven't installed it yet but I did observe that the rebound range of the Slider isn't as wide as the 66 rc2x. I wonder if adding SPV pressure and turning in the SPV volume would have any effect on the rebound speed.



    The rebound on the SPV shocks is only affected when you run less than the minimum recommended air pressure. This is because, without the minimum pressure, the piston stays open and allows the oil to flow both ways without control, through the piston assembly. When the air pressure is adequate, the piston stays shut during the rebound stroke and forces the oil through a conventional rebound circuit.
    Manitou typically specifies a minimum pressure that is about 5 psi too low to be practical, so plan on running at least 5-10 more than the minimum pressure, when doing your initial setup. After that you can experiment with lower pressures if you wish.

    BTW, 10-40 Valvoline Dura Blend makes a great semi-bath fluid for servicing those things. It's cheaper and works better than Manitou's semi-bath oil.
    Don't Use That As Damping Fluid Inside The Stanchion!
    5wt Maxima fork fluid works best there.

    Later, Eric.
    "I thought of that while riding my bike."
    Albert Einstein, on the theory of relativity.

    Peace and Long Rides...

  19. #19
    Hmmmmm
    Reputation: Ericmopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,753
    Quote Originally Posted by TWISTED
    The lower/closer mount will give you the longer travel and higher leverage ratio. You must have the longer 7.875" x 2.25" shock to get the 7.75" rear travel.

    Be careful about pushing the bike too hard.
    He just wants to do AM.

    P.S. Hippie Tech Rules!
    "I thought of that while riding my bike."
    Albert Einstein, on the theory of relativity.

    Peace and Long Rides...

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nickgto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by Ericmopar
    The rebound on the SPV shocks is only affected when you run less than the minimum recommended air pressure. This is because, without the minimum pressure, the piston stays open and allows the oil to flow both ways without control, through the piston assembly. When the air pressure is adequate, the piston stays shut during the rebound stroke and forces the oil through a conventional rebound circuit.
    Manitou typically specifies a minimum pressure that is about 5 psi too low to be practical, so plan on running at least 5-10 more than the minimum pressure, when doing your initial setup. After that you can experiment with lower pressures if you wish.

    BTW, 10-40 Valvoline Dura Blend makes a great semi-bath fluid for servicing those things. It's cheaper and works better than Manitou's semi-bath oil.
    Don't Use That As Damping Fluid Inside The Stanchion!
    5wt Maxima fork fluid works best there.

    Later, Eric.
    Thanks for the info. This is the first time I've owned a Manitou fork, and my buddies that owned Shermans did tell me they are not open bath.I know that both my Zoke888 and 66 are open bath that is why those only use 1 oil weight. When you mentioned 10-40 Valvoline Dura Blend as the semi bath fluid and the 5wt Maxima fork fluid for the dampening inside the stanchion, that totally confused me. I do take it that these fluids would never mix inside. It's a good thing you mentioned this because I was prepared just to use the 7.5w oil from Marzocchi. I guess I have to let my buddy who owned Shermans help me service the fork.

    Does having SPV in the fork prevents it to bob during pedaling the same way SPV works with the rear? I read threads in this board that some people Devolve'd these due to poor bump compliance. I don't intend to do that yet as I'd like to give it a chance.

    BTW MC 9.5 did enlighten me as to what riding style is most appropriate for the DNA. I intend to put the Slider in the DNA as it is less bury than the 66 and ride it as conservatively XC/AM as I can. I know that the Slider is a bit overkill, but at least it's got SPV which should aid in pedalling.
    DH:Mountain Cycle Shockwave 9.5 w/ 888R
    FR:Marin Quake w/ 888RC
    AM:BMC Superstroke 01 w/ 66RC2X

  21. #21
    Hmmmmm
    Reputation: Ericmopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,753
    Quote Originally Posted by nickgto
    Thanks for the info. This is the first time I've owned a Manitou fork, and my buddies that owned Shermans did tell me they are not open bath.I know that both my Zoke888 and 66 are open bath that is why those only use 1 oil weight. When you mentioned 10-40 Valvoline Dura Blend as the semi bath fluid and the 5wt Maxima fork fluid for the dampening inside the stanchion, that totally confused me. I do take it that these fluids would never mix inside. It's a good thing you mentioned this because I was prepared just to use the 7.5w oil from Marzocchi. I guess I have to let my buddy who owned Shermans help me service the fork.

    Does having SPV in the fork prevents it to bob during pedaling the same way SPV works with the rear? I read threads in this board that some people Devolve'd these due to poor bump compliance. I don't intend to do that yet as I'd like to give it a chance.

    BTW MC 9.5 did enlighten me as to what riding style is most appropriate for the DNA. I intend to put the Slider in the DNA as it is less bury than the 66 and ride it as conservatively XC/AM as I can. I know that the Slider is a bit overkill, but at least it's got SPV which should aid in pedalling.
    The SPV will help prevent bobbing on the Slider. A lot of people set them up too firm, because they want to eliminate bobbing, but that isn't the way the fork is going to operate best. The best way to look at it, is to control, but not eliminate bobbing. Set it up, so that it feels similar to a good XC bike on small bumps and hits, but can still suck it up, when you hit something bigger, like a two footer.
    You are going to need the extra firm spring kit at your weight.
    As a side note; if your buddies are using the fork oil in the semi bath, tell them to get the 10-40 wt or the Manitou semi bath oil.
    The fork oil isn't heavy enough to protect the bushings inside the slider over the long haul. Some local bike shops are using the 5wt fork oil in the semi bath and then the customers wonder why the bushings seem "cheap" and don't last.
    Look up the semi bath recommended cc's and don't exceed that measurement per leg, otherwise the fork won't get full travel.

    Here's Manitou's number.
    1-800-423-0273
    "I thought of that while riding my bike."
    Albert Einstein, on the theory of relativity.

    Peace and Long Rides...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    143
    DNA? only for light all mountain

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by End-er
    DNA? only for light all mountain

    Yes, that would be your best bet

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nickgto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    785
    I just installed the Sherman Slider Plus, Deetraks wheels, and crankset and measured the HA. To my amazement, the HA with a 540mm AC height fork with a 7.875 x 2.25 equipped shock set at 7 inches travel mode ( higher shock mount ) was a steep 70 degrees. I find it to steep for my taste and would consider swapping my 7.875 x 2.25 Manitou Swinger 4 way to a 7.5 x 2.0 Manitou Swinger 6 way which was previously on my sold KHS FR2000. I know that it would give me 1 inch less travel but I guess it's worth it considering the very steep HA achieved with the longer e-e shock.

    Before I do the swap though, another buddy is selling me his 170mm 888 RC with 575 AC height. I plan to install that on my Sin and transfer the 170 66RC2x with 555 AC height to the DNA. This would make the Sin look almost like my Shockwave cuz both have the same 888 fork. Anybody interested in getting a newly serviced '05 Sherman Slider for $100 should PM me.

    My target HA is at least 68 degrees so I'm hoping installing the shorter e-e shock at 6 inch mode with the taller 555 AC height fork would do the job.

    Your thoughts please.

    Thanks
    DH:Mountain Cycle Shockwave 9.5 w/ 888R
    FR:Marin Quake w/ 888RC
    AM:BMC Superstroke 01 w/ 66RC2X

  25. #25
    Hmmmmm
    Reputation: Ericmopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,753
    You can slacken the head angle some nick, by using staggered tire sizes.
    Use something like a lightweight 2.4 up front with a 2.35 on the rear.

    Later, Eric.
    "I thought of that while riding my bike."
    Albert Einstein, on the theory of relativity.

    Peace and Long Rides...

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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