Close

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 57
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL.
    Posts
    1,888
    Rep Points
    771.0
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    shiv posted this 2 days ago on e90. update on the progress with upgrading the MAP sensor:

    Hi guys,
    We've spent the last two weeks testing a few higher capacity MAP sensor options. A much needed option for single turbo applications. While the factory MAP sensor can read up to 21psi, it's good tuning practice to have at least 3psi of overhead (i.e., only run 18psi) since PID boost controls logic requires accurate error measurement to functional properly. And so the quest for the ideal upgraded MAP sensor began.

    TEST 1: BMW N20 3.5 Bar MAP sensor
    Click here to enlarge

    It was close to being plug-and-play (required an adapter harness or re-pinning of the terminals on the MAP sensor connector). And it worked as expected. Which is good as well as not so good.

    The Good-- It provided a nice noise-free signal and offer what seemed to be perfect linearity from full vacuum to well over 30psi. It doesn't require an extra Procede input which means no additional wiring outside of physical installation.

    The Bad-- Since the sensor mounts in the charge pipe (pre-Throtte body), it is subject to pressure spikes caused by throttle blade activity. It also doesn't account for the pressure loss induced by the throttle body/blade which can easily account for 1.0+psi at high boost applications.

    Conclusion-- A good sensor for measuring charge pipe pressure. Not so great for measuring actual engine load since it reads pressure from the wrong side of the throttle blade. The DME had an internal model for calculating engine load based upon the pressure differential between the baro sensor (mounted post-throttle in the intake manifold) and the charge pipe pressure. However well it may calculate engine load at stock-like boost pressures, it does a pretty miserable job when running high boost. It also doesn't help that the pre-throttle baro sensor can only read up to 5-6psi of boost before flatlining. Which means that you can easily get an partial throttle scenario (where the throttle blade is partially open) where the baro sensor is maxed out AND the charge pipe pressure sensor is reading an artificially high pressure (due to partial throttle closure). Not really an issue when running stock-like boost pressures of 5-9psi, somewhat of an issue when running FBO levels of boost (15-17psi) and a real big issue when running big turbo boost (20+psi). Understandable given the fact that boost, fuel and ignition control are all essentially being referenced off of an inaccurate load signal.

    TEST 2: GM 3bar MAP sensor
    Click here to enlarge

    Unlike the N20 3.5bar MAP sensor, this unit can only read up to ~30psi. Those familiar with programming stand alone engine management systems back in the 90s are very familiar with this sensor. Also unlike the N20 sensor, this unit reads off of actual intake manifold pressure (post throttle body!) which means that it will read actual engine load and not be subject to throttle blade-induced misreadings/fluctuations. It installs by Tee-ing into a bypass valve signal hose and routing it to the nipple of the sensor. All the sensor needs is 5v and a ground which we tapped from the factory MAP sensor connector. The signal wire from the sensor goes to an unused analog input on the Procede harness.

    The Good-- It reads actual engine load/pressure. It doesn't replace the factory MAP sensor which means that going back to a stock tune doesn't require a sensor swap.

    The Bad-- It's noisy. Not surprising given how old the design is. The signal provided by the sensor is relatively choppy. Back in the 90s, we accepted this and tuned around it. But now, it's a bit out of place. Requires an unused Procede input channel.

    Conclusion-- This option worked better than the N20 alternative given that it is reading pressure off of the manifold. But it's relatively dirty signal made datalogs look a little ugly. The nose was high-frequency enough that it really didn't seem to influence boost, timing and fuel control since the Procede employs an adjustable input signal filter for all load determination. But it wasn't the ideal sensor option.

    TEST 3: AEM 3.5 Bar MAP sensor
    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge

    The MAP sensor signal wire simply feeds right into Pin 7 on the Procede Rev3 harness's expansion port connector. When we designed the Rev3, we accounted for this needed input knowing that it wouldn't be too long before needed a high capacity MAP sensor:
    Click here to enlarge

    Like the GM MAP sensor, this sensor reads pressure from the intake manifold. Which is great. It is also capable of reading up to 35psi of boost which is a bit higher than the GM sensor (and equal to the N20 sensor). Yes, we are just looking ahead But most importantly, the signal generated is beautifully smooth and noise-free as you can see from the logs below:

    2nd->3rd-4th gear NLS run:
    Click here to enlarge

    Zoom in on a 2nd->3rd gear pull (no NLS):
    Click here to enlarge

    In the logs above, Boost (stock MAP sensor) and MAP2 (AEM 3.5bar MAP sensor) are plotted in the same graph. You can see them follow each other closely when the throttle blade is wide open. You can also see the AEM sensor reading 0.5-0.8psi lower due to the pressure loss across the throttle body. But more importantly, you can see that the AEM sensor is immune to the pressure spikes/jaggedness caused by throttle movement which is easily seen in the 2nd log at the begging and end of the 3rd gear pull.

    Calibrating the Procede to accept this sensor was easy since the Procede allows for a secondary MAP sensor. The calibration data provided by AEM:
    Click here to enlarge

    Setting up the sensor as MAP2 in the Procede software:
    Click here to enlarge

    And then I redefining the 0% and 100% (0-255) load scaling (Y axis in procede tables) to now cover 1bar to 3.5bar absolute intend of 0-2.5bar absolute. This allows us to give up any mapping granularity for boost, timing and fuel mapping:
    Click here to enlarge

    CONCLUSION:
    Needless to say, we opted for the AEM add-on MAP sensor over the other options. It provides a cleaner signal than the GM MAP sensor and a far more accurate engine load signal than the N20 MAP sensor. Yes, it requires an extra analog input but we have already accounted for that. Which means better partial throttle boost control, more predictable throttle blade activity and just pain better drive-ability. It took quite a bit of testing to come to this conclusion. But for those looking to make max power with the least amount of compromises, we have your ticket

    Cheers,
    Shiv
    Click here to enlarge
    2007 335i Coupe
    Mods: Check the Garage

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    I understand this, but the performance maps I see 2 possibilities to model what the DME is seeing: DME setpoint or apply some scaling to the actual MAP signal. The reason I'm asking is that I was just thinking about the "theory" in stacking.
    Either way you'll be doing scaling to keep the throttle in the loop on boost control.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,104
    Rep Points
    1,398.3
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Yes Reputation No
    One big thing is missing, BMW's engineers knows what they are doing, so what are the benefits of the stock location? It's hardly the case that the mighty tuning guru outsmarted BMW?
    Click here to enlarge
    997.1 tt
    Kline 200cell exhaust
    997.2/GT2RS IC's
    Cobb E85 custom stage3 tune by Mitch
    ID1000 injectors
    Sachs stage 2.5 clutch

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    The N20 is very interesting. It has a 3.5 bar before the throttle body, and a 2.5 bar at the manifold. While the N55 has a 2.5 bar before and after the throttle. The N54 is a 2.5 bar before 1.25 bar after. It seems BMW is still fine tuning what they want to do. Click here to enlarge

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,104
    Rep Points
    1,398.3
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    The N20 is very interesting. It has a 3.5 bar before the throttle body, and a 2.5 bar at the manifold. While the N55 has a 2.5 bar before and after the throttle. The N54 is a 2.5 bar before 1.25 bar after. It seems BMW is still fine tuning what they want to do. Click here to enlarge
    Well in that case I guess the manifold sensor is for part throttle operation, since boost is lower AND the pre TB sensor would give false reading, or?
    Click here to enlarge
    997.1 tt
    Kline 200cell exhaust
    997.2/GT2RS IC's
    Cobb E85 custom stage3 tune by Mitch
    ID1000 injectors
    Sachs stage 2.5 clutch

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by xbox_fan Click here to enlarge
    Well in that case I guess the manifold sensor is for part throttle operation, since boost is lower AND the pre TB sensor would give false reading, or?
    The DME just blends them together for a full range from vacuum to boost. It's an easy algorithm. Read MAP sensor up until its range and then when over that switch over to the TMAP sensor. Piggybacks do it the same way. At least if you program them to. Which is part of my "meh" attitude towards the discussion. I feel the same way having conversations about what oil weight to use for the motor. It's so unstimulating I zone out and start thinking about my fantasy football team next year. Click here to enlarge

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    2,799
    Rep Points
    2,567.7
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    26


    Yes Reputation No
    Why don't we just switch out the 1.25 for a 3.5 bar. Obviously there are fitment issues here, but how different? And what are the tuning reasons to switch one over the other?

    Or is this basically what shiv has done?

    And I assume we'll have a total of three sensors this way? The two stock sensors plus a T'd 3.5 bar? Also if we swap out the stock tmap for the N20, wouldn't the 0-5v signal being sent to the DME while in valet mode be incorrect data?
    Last edited by klipseracer; 03-28-2012 at 04:23 PM.
    Click here to enlarge
    Join the largest N5X Enthusiasts Group! 2300+ Members Strong!
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/n5xenthusiasts/
    Or the BX8 Enthusiast Group!
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/353105035077862/
    Cars: 2005 E46 330i - Sold | 2007 E90 335i - Crashed | 2009 E93 335i - Current | 1996 E36 328i Sedan

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Stockholm
    Posts
    1,528
    Rep Points
    1,177.6
    Mentioned
    61 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    just got mine Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge
    07 335i AT - MOTIV 750 - MHD BMS E85 - BMS PI - JB4G5 - Okada Coils - NGK 5992 Plugs - Helix IC - Stett CP - Custom midpipes with 100 HJS Cats - Bastuck Quad - PSS10 - QUAIFE LSD - BMS OCC - Forge DVs - AR OC - ALCON BBK - M3 Chassi - Dinan CP - Velocity M rear Toe arms - Advan RZ-DF - LUX H8 - Level 10 AT upgrade
    Click here to enlarge

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by klipseracer Click here to enlarge
    Why don't we just switch out the 1.25 for a 3.5 bar. Obviously there are fitment issues here, but how different? And what are the tuning reasons to switch one over the other?

    Or is this basically what shiv has done?

    And I assume we'll have a total of three sensors this way? The two stock sensors plus a T'd 3.5 bar? Also if we swap out the stock tmap for the N20, wouldn't the 0-5v signal being sent to the DME while in valet mode be incorrect data?
    Cobb could. Doesn't make sense with a piggyback though. Too much work for zero benefit over adding a 3rd sensor.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    2,799
    Rep Points
    2,567.7
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    26


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Cobb could. Doesn't make sense with a piggyback though. Too much work for zero benefit over adding a 3rd sensor.
    What about replacing the 2.5bar tmap with the 3.5 n20 tmap? Doesn't that throw off the readings sent to the dme when the tune is off? 0-5v from 0-3.5bar would give lower boost readings than 0-5v on a 0-2.5 sensor, yes?
    Click here to enlarge
    Join the largest N5X Enthusiasts Group! 2300+ Members Strong!
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/n5xenthusiasts/
    Or the BX8 Enthusiast Group!
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/353105035077862/
    Cars: 2005 E46 330i - Sold | 2007 E90 335i - Crashed | 2009 E93 335i - Current | 1996 E36 328i Sedan

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by klipseracer Click here to enlarge
    What about replacing the 2.5bar tmap with the 3.5 n20 tmap? Doesn't that throw off the readings sent to the dme when the tune is off? 0-5v from 0-3.5bar would give lower boost readings than 0-5v on a 0-2.5 sensor, yes?
    Any sensor change that changes the readings won't work stock. You correct that by making adjustments in the JB4 or flash mapping. While the JB4 on map 0 will function properly if you were to remove the JB4 all together then it would again not work.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by oddjob2021 Click here to enlarge
    Also unlike the N20 sensor, this unit reads off of actual intake manifold pressure (post throttle body!) which means that it will read actual engine load and not be subject to throttle blade-induced misreadings/fluctuations.
    I don't quite get it. If the N20 sensor reads differently or can cause the misreadings as he wrote why would BMW use it themselves?

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    The N20 is very interesting. It has a 3.5 bar before the throttle body, and a 2.5 bar at the manifold. While the N55 has a 2.5 bar before and after the throttle. The N54 is a 2.5 bar before 1.25 bar after. It seems BMW is still fine tuning what they want to do. Click here to enlarge
    I think BMW gave the N20 more overhead in this area for a reason. I think this is a gift.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,894
    Rep Points
    1,422.5
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Let the fear mongering begin.


    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu Click here to enlarge
    Thank you. But I think you are underestimating what it takes to tune a single turbo system at this power level. A flash, by itself, won't be able to do it. Nor with a juice box. Or anything else that is currently available. Selling hardware by itself is a good way to disappoint the user and create an expensive paper weight.


  15. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
    Let the fear mongering begin.
    I know tuners that are stating Shiv's approach isn't correct. What is he basing a flash not being able to do it on? If anything, a flash is the proper way to do it.

    Fear mongering is right.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
    Let the fear mongering begin.
    LOL when you look at his logs it's basically just 18psi straight across as if it's running an 18psi wastegate spring. To suggest no other system is capable of that "precise" control is pretty comical. We will have no issues tuning single turbos with the JB4. Click here to enlarge

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    LOL when you look at his logs it's basically just 18psi straight across as if it's running an 18psi wastegate spring. To suggest no other system is capable of that "precise" control is pretty comical. We will have no issues tuning single turbos with the JB4. Click here to enlarge
    From what I have heard, this is pretty much right on.

    Shiv is not doing anything special guys.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  18. #43
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    135
    Rep Points
    51.6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    From what I have heard, this is pretty much right on.

    Shiv is not doing anything special guys.
    But he is doing it , while others just keep talking about it. You got to give the guy some credit for that.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by funkmobster Click here to enlarge
    But he is doing it , while others just keep talking about it. You got to give the guy some credit for that.
    Sure, of course, but maybe I should put an article together on how he is doing it and why there are other ways and arguably better ways to do it.

    The idea that nobody else can or will do this is just plain stupid.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,462
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Since my opinion no longer matters because I don't own an n54 anymore, I guess I shouldn't say that I believe the only reason others aren't doing it is because the other tuners are not necessarily targeted at big single setups yet. Also, it was the same rhetoric before TD and RBs were out, one sociopath claims noone else can do it, and others claim they can, that it is not their Target market, but when a customer approaches them looking for a solution, it wont be a problem... But according to nuthuggers, I shouldn't be saying any of that because I'm not currently driveng an n54 and my past experience with the n54 is no longer valid

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,927
    Rep Points
    1,376.8
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by funkmobster Click here to enlarge
    But he is doing it , while others just keep talking about it. You got to give the guy some credit for that.
    However, if someone goes with the FFTEC or other turbo hardware to Terry, I'm sure he can tune it as well. There is nothing extraordinary in tuning a car.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,104
    Rep Points
    1,398.3
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    However, if someone goes with the FFTEC or other turbo hardware to Terry, I'm sure he can tune it as well. There is nothing extraordinary in tuning a car.
    This is a disgrace, only the high priest of tuning could pull this off Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge
    997.1 tt
    Kline 200cell exhaust
    997.2/GT2RS IC's
    Cobb E85 custom stage3 tune by Mitch
    ID1000 injectors
    Sachs stage 2.5 clutch

  23. #48
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    135
    Rep Points
    51.6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Well then why did AR fail to finish the Job? Didn't they say tuning was the problem? Why didn't they give Cobb a call or why didn't they just work together with Terry?
    I'm not saying the Procede is the only option , but where everybody failed he made it happen , and he deserves the credit for that.
    Everybody has been whining for years for a single turbo option , and now that we got it everybody starts to downplay the guy who did it.

    So instead of bashing him for what he does and says , prove him wrong and DO IT. Let Cobb or Terry fab a manifold and tune the damn thing .
    Terry always stated he has no interest in this single turbo stuff , but i bet my ass he is working on it already to make the JB4 capable of doing it. Why? Well i'm not going to start the copy story again.

    I'm far from a Vishnu fanboy , i run his tune but i gave up after that REV 2.5 and 3 Upgrade. I don't agree with all he says or does , but just try to keep this forum objective and stop the stupid bias.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,684
    Rep Points
    3,343.8
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by funkmobster Click here to enlarge
    Well then why did AR fail to finish the Job? Didn't they say tuning was the problem? Why didn't they give Cobb a call or why didn't they just work together with Terry?
    I'm not saying the Procede is the only option , but where everybody failed he made it happen , and he deserves the credit for that.
    Everybody has been whining for years for a single turbo option , and now that we got it everybody starts to downplay the guy who did it.

    So instead of bashing him for what he does and says , prove him wrong and DO IT. Let Cobb or Terry fab a manifold and tune the damn thing .
    Terry always stated he has no interest in this single turbo stuff , but i bet my ass he is working on it already to make the JB4 capable of doing it. Why? Well i'm not going to start the copy story again.

    I'm far from a Vishnu fanboy , i run his tune but i gave up after that REV 2.5 and 3 Upgrade. I don't agree with all he says or does , but just try to keep this forum objective and stop the stupid bias.
    I just wrote 3 paragraphs here and deleted them, then tried to reword it and deleted it again lol No point. The gist of it is this:

    1) Thank you Shiv for developing the first Single turbo N54 that works and for pushing the N54 platform as far as you have over the last number of years. If it wasn't for you we'd all be running Sprint Boosters, SSTTs and maybe some lame 350whp flash still or just moved on to other things.

    2) F U Shiv for not starting on the single turbo until now when Cobb and JB4 started to kick butt in the sales and procede sales started to tank and you just needed something else to keep it going. Community waited this long and you wouldn't have even started it now had the other two tunes not kicked in a major way.

    3) F U Shiv for not showing respect for others in the community unless they're constantly hanging off one of your nuts, from enthusiasts to other vendors/tuners, for downplaying their progress and research, putting yourself into God mode all the time and outright spreading misinformation without factual evidence to promote your cause

    4) F U Shiv for the ego that doesn't let you interact at an adult level with others when they have a differing opinion BACKED up by facts through countless datalogs and external-to-tune equipment

    Thanks Shiv, F U Shiv
    Click here to enlarge

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10



    Yes Reputation No
    Dzenno you are one angry Canadian.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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