Quantcast
It is currently Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:27 am

All times are UTC + 2 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:34 pm
Posts: 372
Location: Under my bed
Hi all,

We're replacing some top anchors this weekend - where (Jozi side) can I get hold of hangers with 2/4 chain links welded into them?

Any help would be appreciated.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:41 am
Posts: 711
Real Name: OneDog
hi

I've got some rings that bolt onto the bolts. Chains are helluva expensive - up to R450 something / m (Stainless at least). I'm talking to someone about making rings similar to what I have at the moment

Drop me a line, if you're interested?

PS: Sorry - I simply have not gotten around to "The more you break" yet......


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:18 am
Posts: 64
A few notes on TA's:

Please don't use hardware store chain...ie machine welded chain. It has good tensile strength, but poor lateral [twisting] strength. The tolerances are too low for anchors that people will entrust their lives to.
Look for hand welded stainless steel chain. You might need to import this.
Alternatively, buy anchors from FixeUsa [ http://www.fixeusa.com/Ancors.htm ]. They are expensive though. You're looking at R80 to R100 for a set of rings on hangers. Safety first. If you've decided to 'put back in', then do it properly. Most climbers have no idea how many thousands of rands bolters pump into routesetting, from SDS drillbits, to expensive hardware needed to drill, to the R40 PER bolt placement. The wrecked ropes, clothes covered in glue, the backache from humping 50 kg packs into the hills. It's a labour of love and there should be no shortcuts taken, especially when other people's safety is concerned.

Derek Marshall used to make some awesome galvanized hand welded anchors. They adorn many routes across the country. Perhaps he still makes them? At one point his anchors were even powdercoated in camo brown. What happened to these TA's Derek?

Regarding replacing chains on routes. If the chain has been worn down from people top roping the climb, then the replacement is a standard one. Be sure not to overtighten the nut. The maximun torque on a Hilti Express 10mm stud anchor is 30 Nm. If you've bolted many routes, you'll 'feel' the right tension. If you are new to the process it is advisable to use a torque wrench for this.

If, however, the chain is rusted, one cannot merely just replace the chain. The anchor will actually be more dangerous than if it were just left alone. The bolt will need to be checked for rust, and preferably new anchor bolts should be placed. This becomes especially important when the anchor chains are stainless steel. Often when different grades of SS are put together, they can cause a sped up reaction. You will need to check the bolts for rust damage before replacing the chains. If you just put shiny new chains on there, climbers might be led to think the anchors are new, when the bolts could possibly be suspect.

Remember that your decisions are directly going to affect other peoples' lives. If you take it onto yourself to bolt your own routes, then you must be certain that they will be safe [or as safe as possible]. It's up to you to decide where to put the bolts, to be sure that at any time a person will have a safe fall and not get hurt. The safety of the anchors is imperative. Bolts on routes form part of a greater system of safety. If one bolt pops, the next will hold. This is why we have 2 anchors on top of routes normally. It's to create redundancy in the system. If one bolt fails, the other is there. However, these anchors must be bomber, and if both chains get replaced, and the nuts over-torqued on semi-rusted bolts, you stand a good chance of an accident happening.

Be careful out there, understand the physics of all of this. Read the tech data supplied by Hilti, Fixe et al. Understand the limitations of the gear. In many senses, traditional climbing is safer because you have control of the safety margin. Most consumer climbers just happily clip into a bolt without thinking about the dangers involved. I've seen bolts come off routes with the littlest of effort. One or two whacks with a hammer and it's off!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 7:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:38 am
Posts: 719
Location: Port Elizabeth
Real Name: Derek Marshall
There is a counter argument for absolutly everything said with regard to bolts. Its a complex & contradictory subject. So keep it cheap & simple. There is no perfect solution.

I've seen bits of A1 Golf used as top anchors. Rusted but still strong. Too strong to be removed.

IMO, 2 x 4/6 links of well galvanized hardware store chain (min 8mm) streight onto 90mm express anchor, are the bucks balls. Bolts min 300mm apart. I have issues with how close TA are placed to each other.

Try breaking 6mm hardware store chain.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 7:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:18 am
Posts: 64
Quote:
Try breaking 6mm hardware store chain.

Easy, just twist it, cross load it. Any number of reasons it could part.

Quote:
There is a counter argument for absolutly everything said with regard to bolts. Its a complex & contradictory subject.

Only because you choose to make it so.

Notice how you say min 8mm, but choose to say it's hard to break 6mm.

Anyways, this issue has been discussed to death all over this forum. There are two schools of bolters out there. Those with a conscience, and those without. :cyclops:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:38 am
Posts: 719
Location: Port Elizabeth
Real Name: Derek Marshall
"Notice how you say min 8mm, but choose to say it's hard to break 6mm." 6mm is slightly to narrow to thread.

"Easy, just twist it, cross load it. Any number of reasons it could part." ok, limit the break method to bodyweight & posible senarios linked to intended usage. That is no tractors or bolt cutters.

"Only because you choose to make it so." The counter arguments are endless. SS is complex. Corrosion is complex

"Those with a conscience, and those without."

This is my conscience speaking: please stay off all my routes, I can't control the natural forces that have been weakening & degrading every fixed anchor I have ever placed since the day I placed it. Also, I cannot predict when the Earth will release the next bit of rock from any of the routes I ever opened. I have not counted the falls taken on each crux bolt since it was openned. Also, I can not account for every manner of posible stupidity or miss use of fixed gear on any of my routes. In short if you choose to climb a line bolted by me, its your choice, you have been warned.

See I do have a conscience.

Where is the real Stone? I prefer old evil Stone with that wicked humor. Have you changed to chamomile tea? Or has Justin stolen your log on?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:18 am
Posts: 64
Quote:
"Easy, just twist it, cross load it. Any number of reasons it could part." ok, limit the break method to bodyweight & posible senarios linked to intended usage. That is no tractors or bolt cutters.

Marshall1, seeming to be a trad climber yourself, I thought this would be obvious to you. You mention you like the anchors far apart. First mistake is forming such a steep angle from the two bolts, this angle translates into an increase of force per anchor point of 100% if it had been a triangle it would be 390% This force will be impacting the Cross loaded chain links as well as the two bolts. Cross loading a chain reduces it's strength substantially.
How about those bolts? They are SSteel and probably rated at 2500kgs when new, add a little rust and age and ???? Well we might want to be nice to them and minimize the impact force we deliver to them.

Bottom line is a large climber, taking a fall of just a foot or two could cause the system to fail instantly and since there is no redundancy built into the Anchor System he'd certainly be looking at a potential Death Fall.

Now add to this the car parts/home made anchors/hardware store machine welded specials and work out the impact force a climber on toprope can generate. Imagine now if these climbers bring a long and old, stretched dynamic rope or worse, a static line. A simple fall of a few feet, onto that crossloaded chain anchor, with points placed far apart, could yield forces over and above 600kg's+. I have snapped 8mm harware store chainlinks with forces as little as 50 Nm. Do the maths.

This is why we have tested, rated equipment. What is the point of getting all of this expensive, high tolerance gear, when in the end you might be clipping into a piece of rusty chain?

And yes Marshall, you are right, we cannot predict wear and tear, acts of God etc, but if people are going to bolt climbs, they must make the best possible effort to minimize the risks. It's selfish to take shortcuts. Do this when you're out tradding or something. Not when bolting consumer routes that people will entrust their lives to.

Quote:
Where is the real Stone? I prefer old evil Stone with that wicked humor.

Marshall, I really don't see this as a time to joke. Bolting routes is serious business, and I don't find it the least bit funny that you choose to argue this matter. To condone bad practice is sending out the wrong message. People need to understand that it's not just a matter of buying a drill and some bolts. Placing them has consequences. You are argumentative most of the time, but now, it's just plain pathetic. I couldn't be arsed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:38 am
Posts: 719
Location: Port Elizabeth
Real Name: Derek Marshall
I climb trad, some sport & boulder patheticly, but what you are saying in not obvious. Please educate me & anyone else who is still intrested. Take the time to "be arsed".

Explain what you mean by cross loading chain & how this could happen.

"You mention you like the anchors far apart. First mistake is forming such a steep angle from the two bolts, this angle translates into an increase of force per anchor point of 100% if it had been a triangle it would be 390%" ?? Can you try again. This is not clear.

"I have snapped 8mm harware store chainlinks with forces as little as 50 Nm." How did you do this? Did the break method relate to to the intended usage with regard to top anchors?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:18 am
Posts: 64
do whatever you like.
I don't have the time to explain basic physics to you, or to argue.
whatever.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:48 pm
Posts: 265
Location: Cape Town
Real Name: Guy Holwill
Sorry, if this repeats what was said by Derek and Stone in the rants above.

If my memory is correct, hardware chain breaks around 600kg - which is pathetic.

Bolting chain directly onto the rock is also a stuff up because it usually results in point loads on the second link down from the bolt.

I've been placing 2 bolts (one above the other on slightly overhanging rock) with a hanger and a chain mailon on each bolt. This means that the top anchor carries 100% of the load and the bottom anchor is a backup. The mailons are rated at 2.5 tons and can easily be replaced if they corode. This gives an extremely unlikely statistical chance of failure.

Finally, please DO NOT use the welded ring sets, which contain one bolt with a ring and a chain to another bolt. This system results in you lowering off the single welded ring alone!!

_________________
There's no point being pessimistic, because it probably won't work


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 7:25 am
Posts: 235
Location: Durban
Real Name: Russell Warren
From my recollection the single ring is a minimum of 8mm diameter and welded. I would argue that even if the ring was not welded it is more than strong enough to lower off. Just because a system is not redundant does not mean it is unsafe. If it is strong enough with a big enough factor of safety then it will suffice. Your car has only one break pedal, but you still drive the thing. The reason you do this is because the break pedal has a neglible chance of breaking (excue the weak pun). The same can be said for landing gear of an aircraft. One strut only designed strong enough to take the punch. Guy, has there ever been a case of one of those rings breaking? The same can be said for landing gear of an aircraft. One strut only designed strong enough to take the punch. If it would make people feel better we could work out how much force a ring of that type will take before it starts to open up if the weld seperates for any reason. JFIS Stone 50 Nm is not a measure of force. How do you see a torque load applied to a chain anchor during climbing?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:48 pm
Posts: 265
Location: Cape Town
Real Name: Guy Holwill
Hey Russell

On Sunday we were discussing (with amazement) that no 8mm drop-in bolts broke back in 80's - so I hear you. However you need to ask if the risk of potential anchor failure is justified. After all, there factors like corosion that could significantly weaken the ring.

Cheers

Guy

_________________
There's no point being pessimistic, because it probably won't work


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:18 am
Posts: 64
Russell Warren wrote:
From my recollection the single ring is a minimum of 8mm diameter and welded. I would argue that even if the ring was not welded it is more than strong enough to lower off. Just because a system is not redundant does not mean it is unsafe. If it is strong enough with a big enough factor of safety then it will suffice. Your car has only one break pedal, but you still drive the thing. The reason you do this is because the break pedal has a neglible chance of breaking (excue the weak pun). The same can be said for landing gear of an aircraft. One strut only designed strong enough to take the punch. Guy, has there ever been a case of one of those rings breaking? The same can be said for landing gear of an aircraft. One strut only designed strong enough to take the punch. If it would make people feel better we could work out how much force a ring of that type will take before it starts to open up if the weld seperates for any reason. JFIS Stone 50 Nm is not a measure of force. How do you see a torque load applied to a chain anchor during climbing?


yeah, I know. it was the only method I could use to guage when I was playing with weld a while back. I had the links in my vice and was twist-snapping the links open with my torque wrench. They opened up at around that tension. I'd love someone to do proper tests on chains if you've got the correct equipment to do so. The info would be valuable and would clear up this ongoing debate about hardware store chain being OK for TA's.

Russel, agree about those Fixe rings. I think they are very safe. They are way over-engineered and I'm sure Fixe has done extensive testing with this. They'd not be on the market if there was any chance of them failing, especially in the 'states. The whole point here is that the Fixe rings are purpose designed as climbing anchors. Hardware store chain is purpose designed to lock your trailer up at night.

Guy, you have a point about corrosion weakening the ring, however, it's clearly visible when a ring is either worn or is suffering from corrosion damage.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 5:38 pm
Posts: 333
I have never heard of chain failing - have you? Most out there around the world are just hardware shop chains. I am just guessing but I cant imagine the changes are more than 1000:1 so the chances of 2 failing would be 1 million to one, jeez I might be half way there. I am more worried about being suffocated to death by the black-jacks that seem to be investing our crag bases at the moment!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:38 am
Posts: 719
Location: Port Elizabeth
Real Name: Derek Marshall
Some years back we tested some 8mm chain by droping a 101kg log from 1.5 meters above the chain. The leaches attaching the log to the chain were 1.5m long. We started with climbing rope then changed to 16mm sailing static. Then changed to steel cable because we wanted a break. We broke carabiners rated 23KN, but the chain was intact.

We also tested some 8mm 'U' bolts. With out glue, same tests as above. Only managed to rip them with the steel cable.

Galvanized HS chains on a bolted line at Morgan Bay look less corroded that the SS hangers. SS is a complex material. It could be that the regular SS expansion bolt & hanger combination directly onto rock leads to a movment of electrons & thus a depletion of chrome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:34 pm
Posts: 372
Location: Under my bed
How about these? Might need a mallion and 2 links of chain if the route will be top roped a lot, but fine for mulitpitch?

Comments? Derogatory statements? Threats? Ideas? Plain old flaming?

Image
SS A316 Marine-Grade, rated 30kn down and in a forward direction, relatively cheap (around R27?)

Marshall, those are some interesting test results. Would be cool to see the same on a sample hardware chain removed from service, something that could be representative of a chain that's been on a route for 5 years, for example.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:40 am
Posts: 766
Location: Stellenbosch
Real Name: Nic Le Maitre
Hi
A couple of things:
Stainless steel is just that, steel with high corrosion resistance. It is not galvanised or chromed or coated in any way.
Sandstone/Granite/Limestone doesn't conduct electricity, it's the effect of the salt in the air that leads to corrosion, and not an eletrolytic reaction with the rock.

On the distances between anchors story, this is how it works:
In a system with 2 anchors, joined by a chain, with the attachment point/ring in the chain at the lowest point. The angle formed by the chain is very important, if the angle is 60 degrees then the force on each anchor is 60% of the weight hanging on the attachment point. 90 degrees = 71%. 120 degrees = 100%. 170 degrees = 1150%. (I would have attached a pdf with pictures, but the server wont let me. Mail me nicholaslemaitre(at)gmail(dot)com if you would like to see it in pictures)

NB: this only applies to TA's where they are joined by the chain and not to TA's where the 2 points are not joined together. If they are not joined together, then the force on the upper of the 2 will be </= 100% of the weight on the rope.

_________________
Happy climbing
Nic


Last edited by Nic Le Maitre on Fri May 15, 2009 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:34 pm
Posts: 372
Location: Under my bed
Marshall1 wrote:
It could be that the regular SS expansion bolt & hanger combination directly onto rock leads to a movment of electrons & thus a depletion of chrome.


Nic Le Maitre wrote:
Stainless steel is just that, steel with high corrosion resistance. It is not galvanised or chromed or coated in any way.


I don't think Marshall meant that the SS hangers we're coated in any way... SS gets much of its corrosion resistance from the chromium in the alloy (also added is nickel, manganese, sulfur and phosphorus for varying applications). Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stainless_steel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:40 am
Posts: 766
Location: Stellenbosch
Real Name: Nic Le Maitre
Oops, sorry Marshall, thanks nosmo, misread that one :thumright

Nic

_________________
Happy climbing
Nic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 3:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:34 pm
Posts: 372
Location: Under my bed
Found these from a supplier in Randburg...8mm Stainless 316 @ R295/m ex vat

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 3:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 5:39 pm
Posts: 304
Location: JHB
Seems expensive and unnecessary.

_________________
Open hand, open mind...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 6:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:38 am
Posts: 719
Location: Port Elizabeth
Real Name: Derek Marshall
Our fixed protection application for SS is unique. Our hanger/bolt combo is small, isolated, fixed to well bedded rock, continual exposed to the elements, under permanent stress/tension, able to withstand shock loading & have a life span of 10 years. Most SS is used in marine, automotive or construction environments. Or indoors for utensils & appliances. Nothing quite compares with our application.

Nice looking SS chain Nosmo. The previous option would be more cost effective. Are they R27 landed in SA with the taxes paid? Really cheap. I always wonder if the manufactures really anneal their components. Supose they do.

"I have snapped 8mm harware store chainlinks with forces as little as 50 Nm" - "I had the links in my vice and was twist-snapping the links open with my torque wrench" So your 50N breakage has no relationship with reallity. & notice I said "2 x 4/6 links"...how do you get this to mean 1 chain linked between 2 bolts. Read more carefully.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 7:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:41 am
Posts: 711
Real Name: OneDog
There seems to be a lot of knowledge among you guys, the problem seems to be consensus. I'm no expert and don't pretend to be for a second.

@Marshall: What about 3CR12? It corrodes relatively quickly compared to SS, but it is supposedly a lot more suitable to tensile stresses (if I've got my terminology straight). I know aluminum cracks under repeated tensile forces, and 316 is (merely?) more oxidation resistant than 304.

How can one go about getting these things certified?
- Supplier ISO certifications.
- Tests to verify - CSIR / SABS
- Some sort of SABS / MCSA mark of approval?

I'd be lying if I said I'll get this done - I quite simply don't have the time. I would like to help if anyone's interested.........

I'm talking to someone about the rings, that's it for now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 7:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:18 am
Posts: 64
Nice find Nosmo. That chain is perfect. Looks like R29/anchor? 316 grade SS is the right grade too. It has great corrosion resistance and those welds look hand done. This is chain I'd be proud to put on top of a route. Should get 5 climbs bolted per meter. @ the current hanger price of R15+ this is not bad.

Quote:
I always wonder if the manufactures really anneal their components. Supose they do.

ya, let's hope so.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:38 am
Posts: 719
Location: Port Elizabeth
Real Name: Derek Marshall
3 links/100mm = 30 links/m = R295x1.14% VAT = R336.30/m (unless you are claiming the VAT) Therefore 1 link = R11.21

if you were using 4 links direct to the bolt, taking into account that you would cut every 5th link. 2 x 5 links = R112.10 / route = alot

2 or 4 links on a hanger may be a better option. But then you will need to weld or use a mallion. Welding SS has issues & should be anealed at +1100°C. But then was the chain anealed to start with? Not sure how chain is made? Cost: best practice is to waste one link during cutting & removing from the rest of the chain.

2 link = R97.26/route+welding(maybe anealing)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:18 am
Posts: 64
:alien:
Right you are Marshall. 4 links is better than 2, and yes, you'll need to waste a link to cut it.

Next biggie is how do you claim the VAT back? Maybe it can go down as "Living Expenses"?!

All of this complex math...thats why I just place an order with Fixe every now and then (or VW engine parts if Fixe is out of stock :lol: ). At least I know it's all safe and sound in the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:34 pm
Posts: 372
Location: Under my bed
Thanks for the input everyone.

@emile - about 3CR12
http://www.fanagalo.co.za/tech/tech_grade_3cr12.htm wrote:
Atmospheric Corrosion

A long term atmospheric corrosion programme conducted over 10 years by the CSIR has shown 3CR12 to have very good atmospheric corrosion resistance.
This is what 3 or 4 different tech data sheets say. How good is very good?

Marshall wrote:
The previous option would be more cost effective. Are they R27 landed in SA with the taxes paid? Really cheap. I always wonder if the manufactures really anneal their components. Supose they do.
Those Raumer rings are the ones I got from Emile (pic (c) TwoDogsRunning Manufacturing ), when and/or whether there'll be more of those around I'm not sure.
emile wrote:
I'm talking to someone about the rings, that's it for now.


The only thing that bothers me slightly about the rings is that, when it is placed without an extra mallion/chainlinks+mallion, you'd be lowering directly off the ring, which causes wear on the only piece in the chain. I suppose the fact that the ring is easily replaceable (just screw a new one on), makes this less than a show-stopper?

st0ne, the more ideas get thrown around, the more I'm thinking that fixe might present the best cost+effort scenario. How much do they nail you for shipping? Minimum order size, other issues, etc?

ps. Who knows where to get hold of stainless mallions? Prices?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 8:36 am
Posts: 88
Got some prices, and felt like sharing.

10mm galvanised chain. (safe working load 1000kg) R 75/m

10mm high tensile chain. (Safe working load 3000kg) R 140/m

Attaching 3 links of chain to a hanger by a D shakle works well (and keeps flexability) and makes chains easy to replace.

_________________
Feel the Qui


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 2 hours


Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Exabot [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group