Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) Looking to lose that spare tire? Ideal weight 200+? Frustrated being a large cyclist in a sport geared for the ultra-light? Learn about the bikes and parts that can take the abuse of a heavier cyclist, how to keep your body going while losing the weight, and get support from others who've been successful.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-30-11, 04:01 AM   #1
Blutarsky
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Blutarsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 50,000ft & > mach
Bikes: Cannondale CAD3
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Brand spankin' new or OLD with better components?

Okay, I bought a used and very old CAD 3 - just to see. A hundred miles or so is all it took, and I'm as addicted as I was afraid I would be. The old CAD has 105 front to back, top to bottom. Fast forward to today, and my local has the new Synapse Sora for $700, possibly less. Not trying to start nuclear winter over components, but what's the conventional wisdom here on keeping the old bike (that's technically a size too small at 56) or grabbing the brand new shiny one, albeit with Sora? The 105 comparison to Sora need not be made, but I honestly don't even know how old my current bike is with the 105's - and it has crossed my mind to buy the new bike, swap the 105, then sell it off. That opens another discussion of if that is even feasible. (This is what happens when the noob gets his first hit of crack...)

And I ask on the clyde forum because 1) I am one and 2) people here seem nicer.
Blutarsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 04:24 AM   #2
mgw189
Senior Member
 
mgw189's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Binghamtony,NY
Bikes: 2011 Trek 7.3 FX
Posts: 171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What is the s/n on the bike... that could possibly give a hint to the year of production
mgw189 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 04:32 AM   #3
bradtx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Pearland, Texas
Bikes: Cannondale, Trek, Raleigh, Santana
Posts: 6,495
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Blutarsky, Other than newer I don't see an advantage unless the older bike is too small to ride. The CAAD3 is a good frame and 105 is an excellant entry level race group. You can install a 10S drivetrain for less than $700 onto the CAAD3.

Brad
bradtx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 04:58 AM   #4
Blutarsky
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Blutarsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 50,000ft & > mach
Bikes: Cannondale CAD3
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
189 - Best place to look to find s/n?

Brad - I haven't figured out the answer yet to that one. I got a walk in "fitting" at a shop while back in the states this summer - he said 58 would be perfect. This bike is a 56; I got a great deal on it and I wanted to try this bike thing before I started really flushing my money into it. I'm hooked, but I'm wondering if the bike isn't too small. It doesn't necessarily "feel" too small after cranking the seat WAY up - but hills are killing me as the wheels seem like they're made for a 51cm bike! They look incredibly smaller than what I see on other bikes - the tires are listed at 23-571 which I can't much info on.

In all, it's not all the "new" factor, other than having a bit of a known entity other than being able to read '105' on all of the components. She gets me where I'm going, and well enough to get me hooked. My problem is that give it a year, and I'll be entering some sort of competition. I've raced everything I've ever owned at some point, I can't help it! :-)
Blutarsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 05:34 AM   #5
Biggziff
not as fat as I was
 
Biggziff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Upstate, NY
Bikes: Trek 7000, Trek 5500, Fuji Newest 1.0
Posts: 945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's not about the bike.

Having said that....I will agree that higher end components are attractive and do add to the enjoyment for some (myself included) I've recently gone from an older carbon, full Dura Ace bike to a 105/Tiagra mix new bike. I'm just as fast (or slow) on the new one, but I do miss some of the creature comforts of the DA/carbon bike.

I'm looking at Cervelos now....maybe in the spring.
__________________
humans can be so....rude
Biggziff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 06:08 AM   #6
Blutarsky
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Blutarsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 50,000ft & > mach
Bikes: Cannondale CAD3
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think I follow - it just begs the question, what makes an ill-fitting bike?
Blutarsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 06:19 AM   #7
Biggziff
not as fat as I was
 
Biggziff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Upstate, NY
Bikes: Trek 7000, Trek 5500, Fuji Newest 1.0
Posts: 945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blutarsky View Post
I think I follow - it just begs the question, what makes an ill-fitting bike?
Do a search on youtube or google for bike fitting. You'll get the idea pretty quickly.
__________________
humans can be so....rude
Biggziff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 07:00 AM   #8
Paul01
Senior Member
 
Paul01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tampa Bay, Fl
Bikes: Vitus 979, KHS Montana Comp
Posts: 531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Any chance the shop just wants to sell you the new bike and will say anything to make the sale?
Paul01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 07:00 AM   #9
Mr. Beanz
Banned.
 
Mr. Beanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 20,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I still ride a CAD3, 1998 frame. I used the 07 Lemond as a beater and the CAD3 as my event bike. Very good climber and again, it aint about the bike.



Mr. Beanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 07:18 AM   #10
Blutarsky
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Blutarsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 50,000ft & > mach
Bikes: Cannondale CAD3
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Big - Thanks!

Paul - Actually, no. I'm military overseas, so they are just selling them like they sell lampshades. (Oddly enough, Cannondale wouldn't let them sell bikes unless they hired a C-dale tech to assemble the bikes. But he works "in the back..."

Mr Beanz - That's it! Other than mine being blaze orange, that is. If you don't mind me asking, how tall are you? Those wheels are astronomically bigger than mine, not to mention the frame...

Last edited by Blutarsky; 09-30-11 at 07:24 AM.
Blutarsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 07:23 AM   #11
Mr. Beanz
Banned.
 
Mr. Beanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 20,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm 6'1...THe back wheel sia Velocity Deep V (30 mm deep rim). I use them cause they are strong rims as I have a bad habit of tearing up rear wheels. front is a Mavic CXP33.

They are standard 700c wheels though. ....if they look bigger, maybe it's the 30mm profile (if that's what you mean) or maybe you have 650c wheels used by tri athletes back in the 90's.
Mr. Beanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 07:39 AM   #12
Blutarsky
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Blutarsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 50,000ft & > mach
Bikes: Cannondale CAD3
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's it - I'm the same height and mine look like a kids bike. This all sounds terrible, I love the gal - I really do. I just happen to wander in on a bike that's about $400+ less than retail and wanted a sanity check.

What I really want to know is, can I take the good stuff off of the old bike, slap it on the new and unload her while I ride away on the perfect (for me) setup?
Blutarsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 07:59 AM   #13
breadbin
Senior Member
 
breadbin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West of Ireland
Bikes: Raleigh 531c, Marin Muirwoods, Brodie Romax
Posts: 648
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
as others have said make sure the bike fits and then worry about the components later. keeping the caad3 isn't a good idea if its too small for you. even with dura-ace on it it won't be worth a dime if you can't get comfortable on it:~ but you say it just looks like a kids bike compareed to mr beans, is there any pain or discomfort when riding it? i'm not saying this is true for you but sometimes i keep telling myself my bike is too small just so i can look for a new one

have a look at bike sizing to see if it helps any here http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/fitting.htm

get the right frame and you can swap out the components as time goes on
breadbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 08:07 AM   #14
XLR99
Senior Member
 
XLR99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medina, OH
Bikes: 85 Cilo, '91 Bianchi Volpe, '00 Gary Fisher, '74 Raleigh SuperCourse, '06 Soma Groove, '09 Nashbar X
Posts: 275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blutarsky View Post
189 - Best place to look to find s/n?

Brad - I haven't figured out the answer yet to that one. I got a walk in "fitting" at a shop while back in the states this summer - he said 58 would be perfect. This bike is a 56; I got a great deal on it and I wanted to try this bike thing before I started really flushing my money into it. I'm hooked, but I'm wondering if the bike isn't too small. It doesn't necessarily "feel" too small after cranking the seat WAY up - but hills are killing me as the wheels seem like they're made for a 51cm bike! They look incredibly smaller than what I see on other bikes - the tires are listed at 23-571 which I can't much info on.

In all, it's not all the "new" factor, other than having a bit of a known entity other than being able to read '105' on all of the components. She gets me where I'm going, and well enough to get me hooked. My problem is that give it a year, and I'll be entering some sort of competition. I've raced everything I've ever owned at some point, I can't help it! :-)
Happened to see this while lurking here; the 23-571 I think refers to the ISO tire size, which would make it 650C tires, like from a time trial/Tri bike (?). The standard 700c tires have a 622 ISO size
Here's a link to Sheldon Brown's tire size explanation:
http://sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html
XLR99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 08:34 AM   #15
himespau 
Senior Member
 
himespau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Bikes:
Posts: 9,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In general, I'm all for keeping an old bike if it fits well and rides well and then slowly upgrading components as they wear out/you want newer stuff. But if it's too small, that's a whole different ball of wax.
himespau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 09:27 AM   #16
Seattle Forrest
Senior Member
 
Seattle Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 13,435
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blutarsky View Post
... what's the conventional wisdom here on keeping the old bike (that's technically a size too small at 56) or grabbing the brand new shiny one, albeit with Sora?
Sora has very different ergonomics than other Shimano brifters, making it hard to shift from the drops. That's a big problem for a lot of people.

I just bought a used bike (Cervelo Soloist -alu) with Ultegra 6500. I traded in my commuting bike, which had a more modern Tiagra/105 mix. There's a lot more to it, but I was happy to trade slightly newer, lower end componentry for older, higher end stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blutarsky View Post
I'm hooked, but I'm wondering if the bike isn't too small. It doesn't necessarily "feel" too small after cranking the seat WAY up - but hills are killing me as the wheels seem like they're made for a 51cm bike! They look incredibly smaller than what I see on other bikes - the tires are listed at 23-571 which I can't much info on.
56 vs 58 isn't a huge difference, and can be accommodated (for most people) with a longer stem and by raising the saddle. If you have problems with the fit, they're going to cause you pain, most likely, or just rob you of some of your power. If you have a friend who's moderately interested in bikes, you can check a number of things easily - have him/her drop a plum line from your knee, etc. It sounds like you have 650c wheels and tires, while most road bikes have 700c. For a while, triathletes were in love with 650c on the theory that it could be more aerodynamic. ( Less frontal area, but higher RPM. )

You mentioned that you're interested in racing. If you watch professional races, most people in them ride too small frames for the aero benefit - jacking the saddle way up.
Seattle Forrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 09:48 AM   #17
bradtx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Pearland, Texas
Bikes: Cannondale, Trek, Raleigh, Santana
Posts: 6,495
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
blutarsky, I think you have one of the 'compact frames'. These were built to use 650C wheels. Not a bad thing at all, but not really too popular anymore. The 650C wheelset is stronger than a similarly built 700C wheelset, which is good if you're heavy.

My roadies have been either 56 or 58 cm without fitment issues. If you buy the Synapse I'd keep the CAAD3 (which is likely circa '98 or '99) as a back-up and because it fits into the 'same, but different' catagory.

Brad
bradtx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 09:50 AM   #18
Seattle Forrest
Senior Member
 
Seattle Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 13,435
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggziff View Post
I'm looking at Cervelos now....maybe in the spring.
They're wonderful bikes. I made the mistake of test riding one while the shop fixed my humble REI bike, which, until that point, I thought was pretty great. Ignorance is bliss. That said, you'll probably pay less in the late fall or winter than in the spring.
Seattle Forrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 11:14 AM   #19
gyozadude
Senior Member
 
gyozadude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sunnyvale, California
Bikes: Bridgestone RB-1, 600, T700, MB-6 w/ Dirt Drops, MB-Zip, Bianchi Limited, Nashbar Hounder
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd get a new, larger frame for ISO 622 (aka 700c) wheels. It'll be more prevalent in more countries to get parts, and you won't be asking questions why your bike looks too darn small on everything. The old components -mostly- should transfer onto the new frame if that's what you want to do. The exceptions might be things like bottom bracket, headset, etc. Seat post diameter might be different so that may change as well.

But $700 USD equivalent for Sora doesn't seems like a lot of dough. I hope this is a mil-spec road bike in your size at the PX where you get the other "lampshades", right? LOL! And with your mil-creds, you'd figure they'd have 1-hr shipping at Mach 9.3 in one of those new stealth birds with the new hypersonic propulsion systems, and the Quizno's sandwich that goes with the new bike will still be warm and toasty. But typically, outside the US, the cost of a Synapse Sora is going to run around $1000 USD, so your price isn't bad.

And while many younger riders do like to scrunch up in the drops, I've never liked doing that. I like riding the hoods most of the time. And for that, the Sora brifters are ideal and seem to have a good track record for durability and performance. I am somewhat of a retrogrouch, leaning towards old-school stuff like friction bar-con shifters and old steel frames. But I must admit that I am impressed by the incremental improvements in all lines of components from Shimano, SRAM, Campy and others over the years. Even the lowest end components today, shift and ride as good as some of the best back in the day and while I've read about durability issues with components, I haven't personally observed any myself because, just as in the old days, I continually maintain my gear, so I rarely suffer catastrophic component failures. But what impresses me most about new components, are the parts are designed AND PRICED to be field replaceable. Not exactly the ideal philosophy for reduce-reuse-recycle, but for durable goods that you only need to replace every few years, it's not a bad model. I can find replacement parts that are compatible and shift great starting at $18 online (in the US). Can't vouch for overseas. But when you're a big clyde and ride, you need to think about replacing parts under stress every few years or every 10k miles (e.g. pedals, seat posts, handlebars, stems). That Synapse Sora isn't a bad choice at all. And I think you'll enjoy it even more than your CAD3.
gyozadude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 01:51 PM   #20
nfmisso
Nigel
 
nfmisso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: San Jose, CA
Bikes: 1980s and 1990s steel: CyclePro, Nishiki, Schwinn, SR, Trek........
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Number one is comfort - the bike has to work with you.

With regards to the wheels; ISO571 vs ISO622 - the smaller diameter wheel provides a more responsive, faster accelerating bike; because there is less rotational inertia. Inertia is proportional to mass times radius squared. If the two sizes have the same size tire and rims (ie 23mm tire on 14mm rim); the ISO571 will have the rotational inertia - which is will have a HUGE effect on both straight line acceleration and responsiveness to turning.

I have bikes with ISO571, ISO622 and ISO630 rims&tires -it makes a big difference.

The greater the rotational inertia, the more stable the bike. For example, with the ISO630, if I hit a 1" diameter rock off center on my commute - big loud bump, but absolutely no change of direction. Hit the same rock with the ISO571, and the bike will move a foot or more sideways.

There is a good selection of narrow ISO571 tires, but the widest I could find is the Terry 28-571; made by Panaracer. http://www.terrybicycles.com/Accesso...s-pt-tire-x-c- They are very nice tires.
nfmisso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 02:34 PM   #21
Seattle Forrest
Senior Member
 
Seattle Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 13,435
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gyozadude View Post
And while many younger riders do like to scrunch up in the drops, I've never liked doing that. I like riding the hoods most of the time.
In that case, you might be better served with hipster-looking bullhorn bars, like these:



They give you the same (hand and back) positions as the tops and hoods on brifters. But if you don't/won't use the drops, there's no point in having them. If it were a new bike, you could save money and not just weight this way, because bar-cons are much cheaper than brifters. A lot of people only use the drops occasionally, and that's all well and good ... but if you've never liked using them, they aren't doing you any good being there. ( Of course, when you're not buying a new bike, having something you don't use is less annoying than paying for a new setup. )

Quote:
Originally Posted by nfmisso View Post
With regards to the wheels; ISO571 vs ISO622 - the smaller diameter wheel provides a more responsive, faster accelerating bike
Are you sure? More to the point, it sounds like you're saying it will take less time to go from a dead stop to X mph with the same effort and conditions, with the smaller wheels. But how does the smaller radius balance against the higher rpm/spin rate you need, to get to the same speed with them?
Seattle Forrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 02:44 PM   #22
himespau 
Senior Member
 
himespau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Bikes:
Posts: 9,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seattle Forrest View Post
Are you sure? More to the point, it sounds like you're saying it will take less time to go from a dead stop to X mph with the same effort and conditions, with the smaller wheels. But how does the smaller radius balance against the higher rpm/spin rate you need, to get to the same speed with them?
can't you just make up that difference with a higher gear (essentially get the same gear inches with a smaller cog in the back assuming you're not already on 52x11?
himespau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 03:38 PM   #23
gyozadude
Senior Member
 
gyozadude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sunnyvale, California
Bikes: Bridgestone RB-1, 600, T700, MB-6 w/ Dirt Drops, MB-Zip, Bianchi Limited, Nashbar Hounder
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seattle Forrest View Post
[Re: Riding the drops...] In that case, you might be better served with hipster-looking bullhorn bars, like these:[bullhorns]
Bullhorns are indeed hip! But I have yet to find a satisfactory shifter for bullhorns. Brifters were designed as brake levers for drop bars. The Sora and low-end brifters in general, put the upshift (release tab) on the inside top of each hood where the thumb naturally goes. The bull horns curve up and therefore, one isn't really riding the hood, so you end up losing the convenience of low-end brifters and need to use a more expensive unit for racing and riding the hoods. But the bullhorns put them in a semi-awkward position where the thumb and inside wrist experience a lot of strain to hang onto the bullhorn while popping gears. However, bullhorns are very hip looking.
gyozadude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 03:50 PM   #24
Seattle Forrest
Senior Member
 
Seattle Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 13,435
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by himespau View Post
can't you just make up that difference with a higher gear (essentially get the same gear inches with a smaller cog in the back assuming you're not already on 52x11?
I could be wrong, but my thought is that 650c vs 700c wheels are going to be very similar in terms of acceleration and aerodynamics. Nfmisso suggested that you should be able to get a bike up to speed more quickly on 650s because you have less weight (at less distance) to spin up, but I think this is offset by having to spin it more quickly. Other people say that smaller wheels are more aero because they have less frontal area, but they have to be pushed harder to cut through the air at their higher rpm rate. My hunch is that both wheel sizes will behave so similarly in these two respects that they aren't good reasons to choose one or the other.

Triathletes flirted with 650c for a while for the aero benefits, but no one showed any real gains, and it fizzled out.
Seattle Forrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-11, 04:24 PM   #25
jimnolimit
attacking the streets!
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Bikes: Jamis Coda Elite
Posts: 249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seattle Forrest View Post
Sora has very different ergonomics than other Shimano brifters, making it hard to shift from the drops. That's a big problem for a lot of people.
i test rode two bikes at my LBS with sora shifters, i'm not a fan of the ergos.
jimnolimit is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:57 AM.