Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 51
  1. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,845
    Quote Originally Posted by NH Mtbiker View Post
    You can break any bike if it's used for something it is not designed for...like huckin off 6-8 foot jumps. A lockout feature on any bike is there to function as a stable platform ONLY when climbing and flats at slow speeds. Use it but don't abuse it and you will see all the benefits it can provide.
    Who goes slow on the flats?
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  2. #27
    Save Jesus
    Reputation: beanbag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,701
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Who goes slow on the flats?
    me
    I also go slow on the downs.

  3. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,845
    Quote Originally Posted by beanbag View Post
    me
    I also go slow on the downs.
    Oh Jesus!
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  4. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: NH Mtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    216
    I go slow going down too...especially when I am all locked out and a busted fs frame,,,Damn!
    15 Moto Night Train
    08 BMC Trailfox
    07 Rocky Mtn Solo
    00 GT Pro Performer
    99 GT XCR
    93 Raleigh MT 200

  5. #30
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,173
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    A lockout on the rear is the best way to break a good FS bike.
    Huh?
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  6. #31
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,565
    Agree with the general sentiment that you should let your suspension do its job - lockout is practical on xc race bikes but for most everyday trail/am and up its not necessary.


    But, i don't think its so much about the frame - lockout is dangerous for the shock (a big hit will blow the valves), but the impact to the frame probably isn't a big deal.

    When locked out:
    - Unsuspended parts of the frame (mainly rear triangle) will take slightly less stress, because you're not stomping as hard (your body absorbs more shock than usual too). This also includes wishbone linkages and other linkages on many suspension designs which are common failure zones.

    - Suspended parts of the bike (main triangle, head tube junction, bottom bracket area) will take slightly more, but countering that is that you're not going to be hitting those drops and what not except for an occasional slip up . . on the balance i don't think it will have that much affect on the longevity of the bike.
    Last edited by Procter; 11-21-2012 at 10:53 AM.

  7. #32
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,676
    If you are riding trails where the lockout makes you faster, then you shouldn't really be riding an FS bike in the first place, as chances are it's so smooth you benefit from the weight savings of a hardtail or rigid. Remember that a RACE is about going as fast as possible. Comfort and having fun aren't really part of it. A hardtail will usually still be the best weapon (especially a 29er that can "roll" over stuff easier) due to it's weight, long sustained climbs that are often relatively smooth, and so on. Most of the time it's a "sprint" over a relatively short amount of time (2-3hrs or less). If you're out riding for fun and like to claw up the technical climbs, then a FS bike might be better for you, because the increased traction will help with the climb.

    Here's my biased opinion on wheel sizes:

    There's no replacement for suspension travel, BUT, the 29er hardtail bike has made the 26er XC FS bike obsolete. The 26ers in the 3-4" travel range are easily outdone by a 29er hardtail, and make no mistake it can be difficult to "hold on" while you are bouncing around on that 29er hardtail, but modern components and designs are still lighter than that older-generation 26er FS XC bike, and you carry more momentum through turns and in other places.

    With more "trail" type bikes, then it comes down to more personal preference, some people like a 5" 26 wheeled bike for it's maneuverability and the 29ers of the same size can feel a bit sluggish and heavy, although there are some FS XC 29ers that buck that trend pretty well now.

    With even more travel, like DH bikes, the difference is even more apparent, the 26" wheels and tires are much heavier than XC bikes, so you already have more gyroscopic action, and making it a 29er limits the travel too much, constrains the geometry, and makes it hard to make very tight maneuvers. Not impossible to downhill with a 29er, in fact it's my dream to build up one, but it's where there's the most difference compared to the 26er version IMO.

    Soooo, a 29er hardtail has kind of redefined "fast" IMO, blows by the guys that bought into the "I have to buy a 26" XC FS bike if I'm serious about mountain biking" (helped by media, bike shops, magazines, etc ). It kills these bikes, and it's still a good bit faster than a 29er FS bike due to it's weight advantage, those rocks and tech sections have to be pretty extreme where the 29er FS really starts to shine more, even if it's a matter of dealing with the jarring ride.

    On the other hand, a lot of times it's not about what's "fastest" for many of us. What is your goal? Winning races? Being able to climb tech climbs? Being able to climb extremely steep sustained smooth climbs? It's all different...
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  8. #33
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,173
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    If you are riding trails where the lockout makes you faster, then you shouldn't really be riding an FS bike in the first place, as chances are it's so smooth you benefit from the weight savings of a hardtail or rigid.
    .
    This line of reasoning (which I often see used) would make sense if someone only rides one type of trail exclusively. But in reality, few people do (why would you even want to? ) In fact, most rides I have done anywhere in the country of any real length are not one type of trail surface.

    My bike sees everything from forest service roads to very technical singletrack, and occasionally some road to link up singletrack sections. Even most 100% singletrack rides will have everything from silky smooth to root/rock choked trails. It's not very practical to grab a different bike for each section of trail.

    On some climbs, the lack of suspension movement favors a HT or rigid. Lockout just gives you the option. The weight is almost besides the issue. Sure, maybe on the one smoother fire rode climb you would be better of with a light rigid than a locked out FS, but that ignores the rest of the ride. Lockout gives you a HT only when you want it.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  9. #34
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,676
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    This line of reasoning (which I often see used) would make sense if someone only rides one type of trail exclusively. But in reality, few people do (why would you even want to? ) In fact, most rides I have done anywhere in the country of any real length are not one type of trail surface.

    My bike sees everything from forest service roads to very technical singletrack, and occasionally some road to link up singletrack sections. Even most 100% singletrack rides will have everything from silky smooth to root/rock choked trails. It's not very practical to grab a different bike for each section of trail.

    On some climbs, the lack of suspension movement favors a HT or rigid. Lockout just gives you the option. The weight is almost besides the issue. Sure, maybe on the one smoother fire rode climb you would be better of with a light rigid than a locked out FS, but that ignores the rest of the ride. Lockout gives you a HT only when you want it.
    It's not my idea or perception, but it's what's out there and what a lot of people believe. They are on some group ride with a bunch of friends, and some fit guys on light bikes "walk away from them" on the climbs. If only I had lockout, or my bike was more efficient, or lighter, etc...

    The perception is what's fastest is best. I was trying to make the point that often time's what is fastest is not comfortable or fun, for a variety of reasons. What is fastest uphill may not be fastest downhill. Then there's the issue of where do you spend more time, how technical, etc. That means you gotta really dig deep and look at what you really want to get out of the sport.

    Back in the 90s, even the 2000s and today to a much smaller extent, bike shops, magazines, and everyone in the industry tried to sell the idea that "if you are serious about mountain biking, you need an XC race bike", with race geometry, etc. People even ask me TODAY: "Do you race?". XC racing goes hand in hand with the sport, which is somewhat unfortunate. Even though I did ski-racing, people don't ask me all the time "do you race?" when I'm skiing. It's great that mountain bike racing is organized and ACCESSIBLE to normal people, no doubt, but XC racing is not what the majority of the riders do or want to do.

    So for many people, it boils down to "is it faster", whether this is what they really want or not. I don't agree with it, but this is where they are coming from, And then as you say, it depends so much on the circumstances.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  10. #35
    T.W.O.
    Reputation: mimi1885's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Remember that a RACE is about going as fast as possible. Comfort and having fun aren't really part of it. A hardtail will usually still be the best weapon (especially a 29er that can "roll" over stuff easier) due to it's weight, long sustained climbs that are often relatively smooth, and so on.
    I think this is a good point.

    29er HT may not be as efficient as well design FS but the solid pedal feel can really pump you up in the race situation.

  11. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,918

    Lockouts.

    I disagreee with the earlliest posters who said having a lockout makes you slower. I have a FS bike with a RP3 and wish it had a lockout almost every ride. It all depends on conditions. Having a lockout makes the bike more flexable. I do alot of rides from my house where I spend 45 min onI pavement with several short climbs with 20% grades. My FS bike feels like **** on these hills where I want to stand a hammer. My hardtail with a true lockout on the front feels great. There are situations where having the suspension locked out is an advantage.

    I also disagree that using the lockout is damaging your fork. There may be models where this is true but it is not true of all forks. I have a fox F100 RLC with the lockout with an adjustable threshold and run it with the lockout on like 90% of the time. I set the blowoff so that I can stand and pedal without blowing though it, but it activates with moderate hits. I leave the lockout on basically all the time unless im desending. That fork has been working fine with just oil changes and a couple sets of new seals for 5 years and over 5000 miles. I also have a lefty with a lockout which I use often, but since it has no blowoff threshold adjustment I unlock it on most offroad climbs unless its so steep I want to stand. I have always thought its Odd that I ride my FS bike with the fork locked out, and my hardtail with the fork open.
    Visiting St george/Hurricane? Stay at my vacation rental. Discounts for MTB's

    http://www.vrbo.com/392904

    PM me

  12. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    19
    Its all about energy transfer. HT's are more efficient because the most of the pedaling energy is converted to forward acceleration. This is evident by the fact that a lot of bike companies use(d) rear shocks that utilize(d) a platform (specialized's brain, lockouts, etc.). Fox's Propedal was developed to to mitigate the undesired effect of the shock sinking into its travel in dramatic fashion when an impact blows open the platform or the harshness of a lockout, especially if left on for the downhill. Propedal does a good job of smoothing the transition between a subtle platform to active suspension, but at the LOSS OF EFFICIENCY. You set the sag for good down hill performance then turn on the propedal for the climbs. Think about this, propedal (or increasing LSC) works by increasing the damping to a level where the pedal bob is minimized to try and give that hardtail feel. Great, but what happens is that the energy from each pedal stroke that goes into propelling the bike forward, a percentage goes into compressing the shock. The damping absorbs that energy and it is lost. This is why a lot of people still run hardtails, want lockouts or just turn off any damping to maximize the energy transfer into forward acceleration. Using damping of any kind to counter pedal bob is just robbing energy that can be used for forward motion. As an experiment try increasing the sag (add more air), minimize any damping AND reduce the rebound (this is damping also) and even out the pedal stroke. This will maximize the energy going to forward motion. Yes, the suspension will move more, but the nature of springs is to store and release energy. Damping just absorbs that energy. DW link suspensions are great because, by design pedal bob is countered by rider input thru the linkage and not damping. That is why there are statements from Turner owners not using propedal and Turner runs shocks with a "low" tune (minimal compression and rebound damping). Most of the pedal stroke energy goes to propelling the bike and rider. Realistically, you need some damping (rebound and compression) to improve the quality of the ride, after all we ride mountain bikes.

    $.02

  13. #38
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,173
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBng4fun View Post
    Its all about energy transfer. HT's are more efficient because the most of the pedaling energy is converted to forward acceleration. This is evident by the fact that a lot of bike companies use(d) rear shocks that utilize(d) a platform (specialized's brain, lockouts, etc.). Fox's Propedal was developed to to mitigate the undesired effect of the shock sinking into its travel in dramatic fashion when an impact blows open the platform or the harshness of a lockout, especially if left on for the downhill. Propedal does a good job of smoothing the transition between a subtle platform to active suspension, but at the LOSS OF EFFICIENCY. You set the sag for good down hill performance then turn on the propedal for the climbs. Think about this, propedal (or increasing LSC) works by increasing the damping to a level where the pedal bob is minimized to try and give that hardtail feel. Great, but what happens is that the energy from each pedal stroke that goes into propelling the bike forward, a percentage goes into compressing the shock. The damping absorbs that energy and it is lost. This is why a lot of people still run hardtails, want lockouts or just turn off any damping to maximize the energy transfer into forward acceleration. Using damping of any kind to counter pedal bob is just robbing energy that can be used for forward motion. As an experiment try increasing the sag (add more air), minimize any damping AND reduce the rebound (this is damping also) and even out the pedal stroke. This will maximize the energy going to forward motion. Yes, the suspension will move more, but the nature of springs is to store and release energy. Damping just absorbs that energy. DW link suspensions are great because, by design pedal bob is countered by rider input thru the linkage and not damping. That is why there are statements from Turner owners not using propedal and Turner runs shocks with a "low" tune (minimal compression and rebound damping). Most of the pedal stroke energy goes to propelling the bike and rider. Realistically, you need some damping (rebound and compression) to improve the quality of the ride, after all we ride mountain bikes.

    $.02
    Holy Wall-of-Text! Use paragraphs.

    I believe you are mistaken about damping robbing you of energy that could propel you forwards. Yes, a spring stores energy, the problem with bike suspension is that the stored energy just lifts you back up, rather than propel you forwards.

    What you are saying would make sense if we were talking about traveling by pogo stick.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  14. #39
    T.W.O.
    Reputation: mimi1885's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,011


    Quote Originally Posted by MTBng4fun View Post
    Its all about energy transfer. HT's are more efficient because the most of the pedaling energy is converted to forward acceleration. This is evident by the fact that a lot of bike companies use(d) rear shocks that utilize(d) a platform (specialized's brain, lockouts, etc.). Fox's Propedal was developed to to mitigate the undesired effect of the shock sinking into its travel in dramatic fashion when an impact blows open the platform or the harshness of a lockout, especially if left on for the downhill.

    Propedal does a good job of smoothing the transition between a subtle platform to active suspension, but at the LOSS OF EFFICIENCY. You set the sag for good down hill performance then turn on the propedal for the climbs. Think about this, propedal (or increasing LSC) works by increasing the damping to a level where the pedal bob is minimized to try and give that hardtail feel. Great, but what happens is that the energy from each pedal stroke that goes into propelling the bike forward, a percentage goes into compressing the shock.

    The damping absorbs that energy and it is lost. This is why a lot of people still run hardtails, want lockouts or just turn off any damping to maximize the energy transfer into forward acceleration. Using damping of any kind to counter pedal bob is just robbing energy that can be used for forward motion.

    As an experiment try increasing the sag (add more air), minimize any damping AND reduce the rebound (this is damping also) and even out the pedal stroke. This will maximize the energy going to forward motion. Yes, the suspension will move more, but the nature of springs is to store and release energy. Damping just absorbs that energy. DW link suspensions are great because, by design pedal bob is countered by rider input thru the linkage and not damping.

    That is why there are statements from Turner owners not using propedal and Turner runs shocks with a "low" tune (minimal compression and rebound damping). Most of the pedal stroke energy goes to propelling the bike and rider. Realistically, you need some damping (rebound and compression) to improve the quality of the ride, after all we ride mountain bikes.

    $.02
    Sorry it's pretty hard to read.

    Well, I just disagree. A few reasons that HT is a choice of racers, would be lighter weight and firm feedback, not efficiency. When you stump on the pedals and it feels it the bike is shooting forward it can motivate you to repeat over and over.

    FS would be more efficient because the suspension just absorb the bumps and help you keep the momentum, where HT would just translate the bump into a vertical movement killing momentum. Sag is your friend, reducing it by increase air would just ruining the ride. How's making the suspension firmer help with efficiency?

    The reason why DW link owners not just Turner are not using the PP is because the design is a mechanical PP, when you pedal forward the bike has built in anti-squat and not effecting the suspension. DW links riders can set whatever sag they want from 25-40% and not effecting the pedaling. The main reason why bike companies still spec bikes with PP is because usually the feature is offer in the highend models.

    Any well designed, suspension designs can reduce or eliminate the pedaling bob with out the use of propedal. It takes some time to properly transition from HT to FS but once that done it's all good. Using pp on the trail is pretty much defeats the idea of having full suspension.

    Sent from my iPad 2

  15. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,845
    Quote Originally Posted by mimi1885 View Post
    Using pp on the trail is pretty much defeats the idea of having full suspension.

    Sent from my iPad 2
    Not if tuned properly.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  16. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,845
    Quote Originally Posted by mimi1885 View Post

    FS would be more efficient because the suspension just absorb the bumps and help you keep the momentum, where HT would just translate the bump into a vertical movement killing momentum
    It depends where you are riding and how you ride. That statement isn't always true.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  17. #42
    T.W.O.
    Reputation: mimi1885's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    It depends where you are riding and how you ride. That statement isn't always true.
    Yes, where and how is the key. Buff trails why not? as for the how, I'd think that moving your body mass around to manipulate the bike so that both wheels would not hit the bump would mean that the rider spend more energy than just pedaling, regardless of how effortless a skill riders make it look

  18. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,845
    Quote Originally Posted by mimi1885 View Post
    not efficiency. When you stump on the pedals and it feels it the bike is shooting forward it can motivate you to repeat over and over.
    That sounds like efficiency to me.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  19. #44
    T.W.O.
    Reputation: mimi1885's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    That sounds like efficiency to me.
    yeah in that context

  20. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    521
    Ages ago, my canary yellow Y-33 featured a slick Stratos shock with a handlebar lever lockout. When it was locked, the thing didn't move a mm. Then again, when open that design left a lot to be desired! (esp by today's suspension standards)

    Fast-forward to today and you have some incredible designs (like DW Link) which benefit from active travel for 99% of all terrain. (my own BS number)

    Oh, and I believe Specialized bought-out Stratos shock and use them now (in some capacity) for their own suspension designs.

  21. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Pelly_NH View Post
    Ages ago, my canary yellow Y-33 featured a slick Stratos shock with a handlebar lever lockout. When it was locked, the thing didn't move a mm. Then again, when open that design left a lot to be desired! (esp by today's suspension standards)

    Fast-forward to today and you have some incredible designs (like DW Link) which benefit from active travel for 99% of all terrain. (my own BS number)

    Oh, and I believe Specialized bought-out Stratos shock and use them now (in some capacity) for their own suspension designs.
    No, the big S sued Stratos out of existence. I still have two of those shocks. You were right, when locked, they didn't budge. But, for the time, they were very good shocks.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  22. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    19
    All good points. Efficiency is how much of the energy inputed is converted to work. As related to mountain biking, energy from a pedal stroke in converted to forward motion and squating the suspension, so a percentage gets stored in the compression of the shock. If damped, this is lost. If not damped, the spring returns the energy. This return of energy can work in our favor or against us. It just depends on which side of the "bump" the wheel is on. A pogo stick returns the stored energy, but if one is leaning forward the energy propels one forward. If one is leaning backward...you get the picture. Think about it, ever experience a slowdown in speed going downhill while going over certain sized bumps? If the frequency is such that the spring unloads the wheel on the front side of the next bump, you just lost some of the forward momentum. When you ride pump tracks your legs are the spring and you always unload on the back side of a bump to keep the momentum going without having to pedal. Try it if you haven't. It is actually pretty fun.

    Biking is pure physics. That simplicity is the attraction of biking in general. Gone off on a slight tangent, but hope this sheds some light. At the least something too chew on!

  23. #48
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,173
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBng4fun View Post
    All good points. Efficiency is how much of the energy inputed is converted to work. As related to mountain biking, energy from a pedal stroke in converted to forward motion and squating the suspension, so a percentage gets stored in the compression of the shock. If damped, this is lost. If not damped, the spring returns the energy. This return of energy can work in our favor or against us. It just depends on which side of the "bump" the wheel is on. A pogo stick returns the stored energy, but if one is leaning forward the energy propels one forward. If one is leaning backward...you get the picture. Think about it, ever experience a slowdown in speed going downhill while going over certain sized bumps? If the frequency is such that the spring unloads the wheel on the front side of the next bump, you just lost some of the forward momentum. When you ride pump tracks your legs are the spring and you always unload on the back side of a bump to keep the momentum going without having to pedal. Try it if you haven't. It is actually pretty fun.

    Biking is pure physics. That simplicity is the attraction of biking in general. Gone off on a slight tangent, but hope this sheds some light. At the least something too chew on!
    You appear to have a very good grasp of the underlying physics, here.

    However, you are seriously mis-applying them to pedaling and suspension.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  24. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,696
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    You appear to have a very good grasp of the underlying physics, here.

    However, you are seriously mis-applying them to pedaling and suspension.
    ^ This.

  25. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,845
    Quote Originally Posted by bad mechanic View Post
    ^ This.
    ^ That
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 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
  •