Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Bicycle Mechanics
Reload this Page >

lacing paired spoke hole hubs to conventionally drilled rims

Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

lacing paired spoke hole hubs to conventionally drilled rims

Old 09-12-13, 04:47 PM
  #1  
norbikes
Member
Thread Starter
 
norbikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mt. Vernon, IA
Posts: 39

Bikes: lots!!

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
lacing paired spoke hole hubs to conventionally drilled rims

Is it feasible to lace a paired hole hub to a rim w conventionally (evenly-spaced holes) drilled rim? I have a 28 hole hub w 7 pair of holes per flange. I want to lace it to a rim with 28 evenly spaced holes.
norbikes is offline  
Old 09-12-13, 05:00 PM
  #2  
FBinNY 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 36,049

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 121 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4339 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
It's very feasible and builds a decent. You'll have to do some calculating for spoke lengths, but the hardest part might be deciding to phase the left and right flanges.

When calculating spoke lengths for non normal builds, I abandon calculators and go back to what we did before computer power got cheap.

Decide which holes in each flange will have the spokes going in the most opposite directions. Measure the distance apart of these holes (across centerline of the hub). Subtract from ERD (allowing for nipple height), and divide by two. Now add 1mm for every 10mm of CTF measurement, + another 2mm for good luck (accounts for over/under lace, and other stuff) and you have a spoke length that should work.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 09-16-13, 06:30 AM
  #3  
norbikes
Member
Thread Starter
 
norbikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mt. Vernon, IA
Posts: 39

Bikes: lots!!

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanx for the info. It appears that only radial or 1x spoking patterns are feasible w paired holes. It's been a learning experience!
norbikes is offline  
Old 09-16-13, 08:33 AM
  #4  
FBinNY 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 36,049

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 121 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4339 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by norbikes View Post
Thanx for the info. It appears that only radial or 1x spoking patterns are feasible w paired holes. It's been a learning experience!
I'd say it's quite the opposite. 1x builds are always problematic unless you don't lace over under. Radials with paired holes worsen the basic issue of radials, namely concentred radial stress at the spoke holes, so I'd avoid that.

As for other cross patterns, I don't see your problem unless your hub is drilled so you can't have spokes coming off from alternate sides.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 09-16-13, 10:22 AM
  #5  
eddy m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY View Post
Decide which holes in each flange will have the spokes going in the most opposite directions. Measure the distance apart of these holes (across centerline of the hub). Subtract from ERD (allowing for nipple height), and divide by two. Now add 1mm for every 10mm of CTF measurement, + another 2mm for good luck (accounts for over/under lace, and other stuff) and you have a spoke length that should work.
WTF??? what does " spokes going in the most opposite directions" mean? or CTF?

em

Last edited by eddy m; 09-16-13 at 10:27 AM.
eddy m is offline  
Old 09-16-13, 10:27 AM
  #6  
eddy m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by norbikes View Post
Thanx for the info. It appears that only radial or 1x spoking patterns are feasible w paired holes. It's been a learning experience!
I have the same problem of a paired spoke hub that I can't find a paired spoke rim for. I wouldn't do radial that way. You would have a wheel with one side all slightly trailing spokes, the other side all slightly leading. I would be afraid that a sharp bump would pop the rim to a completely de-tensioned condition.

em
eddy m is offline  
Old 09-16-13, 10:33 AM
  #7  
cxwrench
Senior Member
 
cxwrench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Nor-Cal
Posts: 237

Bikes: lots

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
WTF??? what does " spokes going in the most opposite directions" mean? or CTF?

em
Exactly what Francis said...the holes where the spokes will be pointing closest to 180° from each other. CTF is 'center to flange'. For calculating spoke length it is one of 3 important measurements, the other 2 being flange diameter and flange to locknut.
cxwrench is offline  
Old 09-16-13, 10:33 AM
  #8  
FBinNY 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 36,049

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 121 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4339 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
If you follow the post, you'll see that I was referencing an empirical way of calculating spokes, as we used to before cheap computer power made the current system easier.

The spokes going in the opposite direction are for example a left twist spoke going to 12 o'clock and the right twist spoke going nearest to 6 o'clock. These two spokes lie almost in a straight line, and meet on the hub a few holes apart. Discounting the effects of angles and flange separation their lengths added to the distance they come up short of meeting equals the ERD. Then it's a matter of correcting for the deviation from straight lines.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 09-16-13, 11:13 AM
  #9  
eddy m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Now I understand, but that still does solve the problem of a paired spoke hub with a conventional rim.
If I build up my paired spoke hub, I'm going to lace the drive side like a conventional wheel, then adjust the lengths of the non drive spokes to match that. Radial non drive would be easiest to calculate, but I don't think it's stable with a mixed drilled wheel. If I can find a rim with the same ERD, I'll only need to buy 14 spokes

em
eddy m is offline  
Old 09-16-13, 11:34 AM
  #10  
FBinNY 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 36,049

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 121 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4339 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
Now I understand, but that still does solve the problem of a paired spoke hub with a conventional rim.
If I build up my paired spoke hub, I'm going to lace the drive side like a conventional wheel, then adjust the lengths of the non drive spokes to match that. Radial non drive would be easiest to calculate, but I don't think it's stable with a mixed drilled wheel. If I can find a rim with the same ERD, I'll only need to buy 14 spokes

em
If you can't do it in space, get a large piece of paper like a dress maker would.

Trace the rim (ID or OD is OK, you'll compensate for ERD later). Draw the hub in the middle, and locate the spoke holes for each flange together. To help keep it straight make make one set of holes red and the other green (or whatever you have). Do that in Ink. Then lightly sketch in your spoke plan for both flanges, until you've visualized the entire wheel.

Measure the spoke lengths and compensate for ERD. Then add 1mm for over/under lacing (if you do so) and 1mm for every 10mm of non-flatness (CTF). You'll be within 1mm if you work carefully.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 09-16-13, 11:46 AM
  #11  
eddy m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY View Post
If you can't do it in space, get a large piece of paper like a dress maker would.

Trace the rim (ID or OD is OK, you'll compensate for ERD later). Draw the hub in the middle, and locate the spoke holes for each flange together. To help keep it straight make make one set of holes red and the other green (or whatever you have). Do that in Ink. Then lightly sketch in your spoke plan for both flanges, until you've visualized the entire wheel.

Measure the spoke lengths and compensate for ERD. Then add 1mm for over/under lacing (if you do so) and 1mm for every 10mm of non-flatness (CTF). You'll be within 1mm if you work carefully.
That's what I thought I would do last week. This week I'm thinking I'll just hack a spoke calculator. Unless I change my mind, then I'll do it on paper. Or maybe I'll buy a conventional rim and drill extra holes in it. Maybe I'll just drill one extra hole in the rim I have to avoid the cracked hole. That way I only need to buy one spoke.

em
eddy m is offline  
Old 09-23-13, 05:02 AM
  #12  
norbikes
Member
Thread Starter
 
norbikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mt. Vernon, IA
Posts: 39

Bikes: lots!!

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Using Roger Musson's spoke calc program I entered "14" as the no. of spoke holes----ie, half the 28 paired drilling. This gave me spoke lengths that worked out fine for radial/1x lacing. More x's not feasible due to the different flange sizes (46/64).
norbikes is offline  
Old 09-23-13, 05:42 AM
  #13  
dabac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,947
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 812 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
... I wouldn't do radial that way. You would have a wheel with one side all slightly trailing spokes, the other side all slightly leading. I would be afraid that a sharp bump would pop the rim to a completely de-tensioned condition.
Not a problem, at least for a front.
All-leading, all-trailing build up just fine. But you'd want to avoid the combination of 3X spoke angles on slender hubs, as the collected torque may twist the hub spindle.
dabac is offline  
Old 09-23-13, 06:17 AM
  #14  
eddy m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by norbikes View Post
Using Roger Musson's spoke calc program I entered "14" as the no. of spoke holes----ie, half the 28 paired drilling. This gave me spoke lengths that worked out fine for radial/1x lacing. More x's not feasible due to the different flange sizes (46/64).
How does that work? A 14 spoke wheel has 7 spokes on each side, so the only pattern is radial.
What you need to do is calculate the lengths for a conventional 28 spoke wheel, then adjust at least one side for the incorrect hub drilling.
I'm not using one side radial, because I would always worry that the hub could twist out of alignment, leaving the wheel detensioned.

em. PE
eddy m is offline  
Old 09-23-13, 06:24 AM
  #15  
eddy m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dabac View Post
Not a problem, at least for a front.
All-leading, all-trailing build up just fine. But you'd want to avoid the combination of 3X spoke angles on slender hubs, as the collected torque may twist the hub spindle.
I'm sure that an all leading all trailing wheel will build up, but that doesn't prove that it is stable. The question is whether the hub will twist to a position where all the leading spokes become trailing spokes, and all the trailing become leading. With the small angles of a nearly radial build, that might happen pretty easily.
I hope your not riding that wheel in a paceline with me.

em. PE
eddy m is offline  
Old 09-23-13, 07:18 AM
  #16  
dabac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,947
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 812 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
I'm sure that an all leading all trailing wheel will build up, but that doesn't prove that it is stable.
Nor does your suspicion prove that it isn't.

Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
The question is whether the hub will twist to a position where all the leading spokes become trailing spokes, and all the trailing become leading.
And for a front, rim braked wheel, why would it?
Whichever way you try to push the hub, the spokes will still remain in tension, trying to maintain the orientation.
True, if enough spokes go slack, the wheel will collapse - as it would for any other lacing pattern.

Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
With the small angles of a nearly radial build, that might happen pretty easily.
Can you explain how you see that happening, where would the force be coming from?

Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
I hope your not riding that wheel in a paceline with me
Don't worry, I don't do pacelines.

So before you join a paceline, or allows someone to join yours, what do you do? Hold a 10-point safety inspection? Check the rider for sobriety and alertness?

I've never seen an accident that could be reliably attributed to the lacing pattern. I've seen chains breaking, forks breaking, tire beads breaking - but mostly I've seen concentration breaking.

Of all the things that are possible to worry about in terms of root causes for accidents in general and mechanical failures in particular, risks associated with lacing patterns are so far down the list as to be basically out of sight for me. I'd even quite happily ride alongside someone using a radial lace on what isn't a radial-approved approved hub. And those I know can spontaneously self-destruct at any given moment.
dabac is offline  
Old 09-23-13, 09:42 AM
  #17  
eddy m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Dabac
Why would I want to add a second failure mode to a flexible structure? The question isn't "why would it do that?", it's "how much force does it take to do that?" I don't know any way of estimating the type of load that would twist the hub out alignment, so I would probably need to do destructive testing to figure it out.
What problem does it solve? I still need to calculate spoke lengths for the mis-drilled hub. How hard can that be? It's a simple trigonometry problem. I just need to make accurate measurements off the hub.

em, PE
eddy m is offline  
Old 09-23-13, 09:48 AM
  #18  
FBinNY 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 36,049

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 121 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4339 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
I'm sure that an all leading all trailing wheel will build up, but that doesn't prove that it is stable.
Maybe this does. Merlyn has been building wheels like this for years. They're more of a novelty than meeting a technical need, but as long as the barrel of the hub is strong enough to resist twisting, they hold up fine.

BTW- when the hub isn't strong enough, the center twists only enough to relax tension until it's within the barrel's strength range. The wheel does not suddenly collapse. Years ago I built a rear like this just to prove a point. The hub twisted slightly, then stabilized and the wheel lasted until it was destroyed in a crash.

There's no sense to these odd patterns, but they're not in any way unsafe.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.

Last edited by FBinNY; 09-23-13 at 09:52 AM.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 09-23-13, 10:32 AM
  #19  
eddy m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY View Post
They're more of a novelty than meeting a technical need, but as long as the barrel of the hub is strong enough to resist twisting, they hold up fine.

BTW- when the hub isn't strong enough, the center twists only enough to relax tension until it's within the barrel's strength range. The wheel does not suddenly collapse. Years ago I built a rear like this just to prove a point. The hub twisted slightly, then stabilized and the wheel lasted until it was destroyed in a crash.

There's no sense to these odd patterns, but they're not in any way unsafe.
So your experience is that it can de-tension and destroy the hub by twisting if it is laced too tangentially, a trained structural engineer suspects that it may fail in a way not possible for other lacing patterns, especially if it is laced nearly radially, and there's no sense to doing it.
I don't think I'll be building one of those anytime soon.

em, PE
eddy m is offline  
Old 09-23-13, 10:46 AM
  #20  
dabac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,947
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 812 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
Why would I want to add a second failure mode to a flexible structure?
It's not about wanting to add, it's about accepting in the light of other perceived advantages becoming available.
And, if the probability of the added failure mode to occur is several order of magnitudes smaller than the already known failure modes and risks, the added risk may well be insignificant.

Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
...The question isn't "why would it do that?",
It sure is.

If there isn't a "why", then how much force would it take becomes unimportant.
You might as well worry about the fork legs splaying outwards. It'd be fairly easy to figure out that force, but without a way for that force to be applied, it doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
What problem does it solve?
If you're starting a build from scratch, the only problem it solves is a lack of character to a wheel.
If you're building from existing parts, it may let you reuse stuff you already have as opposed to waiting for an order to be delivered.
dabac is offline  
Old 09-24-13, 12:05 AM
  #21  
mrrabbit 
Senior Member
 
mrrabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 3,343

Bikes: 2001 Tommasini Sintesi w/ Campagnolo Daytona 10 Speed

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
My spoke length calculation spreadsheet has had the tool necessary for over a year now...

Make certain you read the instruction for which way the spokes go direction-wise when lacing a paired hole hub to a traditional rim.

http://www.mrrabbit.net/wheelsbyflemingapplications.php

=8-)
__________________
5000+ wheels built since 1984...

Disclaimer:

1. I do not claim to be an expert in bicycle mechanics despite my experience.
2. I like anyone will comment in other areas.
3. I do not own the preexisting concepts of DISH and ERD.
4. I will provide information as I always have to others that I believe will help them protect themselves from unscrupulous mechanics.
5. My all time favorite book is:

Kahane, Howard. Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life
mrrabbit is offline  
Old 09-24-13, 07:42 AM
  #22  
eddy m
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Mrrabbit
Thanks for that, but I have a question. It looks to me that the calculator gives only 1 value for spoke length. I think i need at least 2 values, one for leading spokes, one for trailing. (Actually, I'm hoping to re-use my drive side spokes, and make all the length adjustments on the other side, so I'll need use 3 different lengths.) Am I wrong?

em
eddy m is offline  
Old 09-24-13, 08:25 AM
  #23  
mrrabbit 
Senior Member
 
mrrabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 3,343

Bikes: 2001 Tommasini Sintesi w/ Campagnolo Daytona 10 Speed

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by eddy m View Post
Mrrabbit
Thanks for that, but I have a question. It looks to me that the calculator gives only 1 value for spoke length. I think i need at least 2 values, one for leading spokes, one for trailing. (Actually, I'm hoping to re-use my drive side spokes, and make all the length adjustments on the other side, so I'll need use 3 different lengths.) Am I wrong?

em
Use the tool to figure out the crossing numbers to use for each side. Plug those crossing numbers into any spoke length calculator you want to use. For mine, you'll have to reset the crossing input each time.

If you try to reuse spokes that don't match any result - you might end up with 1/4 of the spokes being a mm too short or a mm too long. Probably won't be a deal killer using 12mm brass or alloy nipples...

If you use all the same size drive side - then the longs on the non-drive will be roughly another .5 - 1.00 mm longer and the shorts on the non-drive will be roughly another .5 - 1.00 mm shorter than calculated.

Bottom-line though - you the wheel builder are the judge.

Just remember as indicated in the tool - the pair of spokes at the paired holes start out going away from each other - not crossing.

=8-)
__________________
5000+ wheels built since 1984...

Disclaimer:

1. I do not claim to be an expert in bicycle mechanics despite my experience.
2. I like anyone will comment in other areas.
3. I do not own the preexisting concepts of DISH and ERD.
4. I will provide information as I always have to others that I believe will help them protect themselves from unscrupulous mechanics.
5. My all time favorite book is:

Kahane, Howard. Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life
mrrabbit is offline  

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.