Carbon to Ti frame.
#51
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,109
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5035 Post(s)
Liked 8,234 Times
in
3,892 Posts
I am not expressing my opinion here -- I am relaying scientific fact, that has been proven decades ago and repeatedly since. You can choose to pretend that those facts do not exist, if you like, but that will not make them disappear.
No one suggested that it is. But again, the energy input that discomforts riders occurs in the vertical plane.
No one suggested that it is. But again, the energy input that discomforts riders occurs in the vertical plane.
Originally Posted by TC1
Most riders do not turn the pedals while cornering, first of all. And turning the pedals is very much not mutually-exclusive with riding in a straight line, so your first sentence there does not make much sense.
Second, again, for not even the second time, lateral and torsional deflection affect the handling of a bicycle, but not the comfort perceived by the rider -- those are two different qualities.
Second, again, for not even the second time, lateral and torsional deflection affect the handling of a bicycle, but not the comfort perceived by the rider -- those are two different qualities.
Stop trying to stuff everything into boxes. A human riding a bicycle is a constantly dynamic activity.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Likes For Eric F:
#52
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,109
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5035 Post(s)
Liked 8,234 Times
in
3,892 Posts
As someone who has taken all of the parts from one bike, and put them on another, multiple times, my experiences is that there was definitely a difference I could perceive every time I made a change. How much was related to differences in geometry, and how much was frame material, I'm not able to tell you in a meaningful way. I had aluminum bikes that felt harsh and nervous, aluminum bikes that felt soft and relaxed (comparatively), and CF bikes that felt different ways. While I don't completely agree (based on my personal experiences) that the frame doesn't matter, I would agree that the frame material might matter less to comfort than the marketing folks would have you believe. An uneducated conclusion I've come to is that a frame's lateral stiffness plays a fairly meaningful role in the net result.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,953
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4843 Post(s)
Liked 3,968 Times
in
2,578 Posts
I regularly move parts from one frame to another. The ride changes. My ti bikes have nearly the same parts as my steel bikes. Again, different rides. I feel those differences. And I've been told for many years my body is wrong; that I cannot.
I loved the sublime ride of the old tubular rims and sewups. That didn't happen over my 25 years on clinchers with Open Pro rims and the like; all of which were much stiffer than the old shallow tubular rims. The later tubular GP4s are also deeper and aren't quite as sublime a ride on rougher road surfaces. Another place I noticed the difference was on Cycle Oregon when I hit a potholed stretch going quite fast. On those tiny, rock hard tires. I hit a far pothole edge hard. This would have been a real shock with my previous Open Pros unless I was running modern pressures and with those skinny tires (biggest frame allowed) put me very close to pinch flat. Instead, the bike took that hit completely in stride. And it was "oh yeah! I remember this from my racing days."
You can tell me I'm imaging things but my bikes and body tell me otherwise. If the test don't back me up, well maybe they are not looking at what matters.
I loved the sublime ride of the old tubular rims and sewups. That didn't happen over my 25 years on clinchers with Open Pro rims and the like; all of which were much stiffer than the old shallow tubular rims. The later tubular GP4s are also deeper and aren't quite as sublime a ride on rougher road surfaces. Another place I noticed the difference was on Cycle Oregon when I hit a potholed stretch going quite fast. On those tiny, rock hard tires. I hit a far pothole edge hard. This would have been a real shock with my previous Open Pros unless I was running modern pressures and with those skinny tires (biggest frame allowed) put me very close to pinch flat. Instead, the bike took that hit completely in stride. And it was "oh yeah! I remember this from my racing days."
You can tell me I'm imaging things but my bikes and body tell me otherwise. If the test don't back me up, well maybe they are not looking at what matters.
Likes For 79pmooney:
#54
Full Member
An important factor that you might be missing is that even pedaling a bike in a (relatively) straight line exerts lateral and torsional forces on the frame. The force on the pedals is not aligned with the vertical axis of the frame. How the frame reacts to those forces and transmits vibrations back to the rider has an effect the perceived comfort of the ride.
Second, those lateral and torsional forces still do not matter to the rider's comfort -- so this is not "an important factor" in any way, shape, or form.
You might not like that fact, much like audiophiles famously cannot come to grips with the fact that fancy speaker wires do not have any audible effect, but science does not care what you like.
Last edited by TC1; 11-07-23 at 09:45 PM. Reason: remove extra end-quote
Likes For TC1:
#55
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,109
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5035 Post(s)
Liked 8,234 Times
in
3,892 Posts
First off, if pedaling your bike produces significant vibrations that are sufficient to make your bike uncomfortable to ride, clean or replace your bottom bracket bearings, because there must be gravel or something inside. The pedals on a properly-maintained bicycle turn with no such vibration -- and even if they didn't, are isolated from the frame by grease and bearings. Do you use special, audiophile grease on your bikes to assure that all the vibrations are faithfully reproduced by your bearings?
Second, those lateral and torsional forces still do not matter to the rider's comfort -- so this is not "an important factor" in any way, shape, or form.
Some things belong in boxes. Other things belong in landfills, such as the long-since disproven idea that material selection affects the ride quality of a rigid double-triangle bicycle frame.
You might not like that fact, much like audiophiles famously cannot come to grips with the fact that fancy speaker wires do not have any audible effect, but science does not care what you like.
Second, those lateral and torsional forces still do not matter to the rider's comfort -- so this is not "an important factor" in any way, shape, or form.
Some things belong in boxes. Other things belong in landfills, such as the long-since disproven idea that material selection affects the ride quality of a rigid double-triangle bicycle frame.
You might not like that fact, much like audiophiles famously cannot come to grips with the fact that fancy speaker wires do not have any audible effect, but science does not care what you like.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
#56
Full Member
The simple fact that you claim there was a significant difference "every time" is evidence enough that you are a victim of confirmation bias -- and there's no shame in that, everyone is susceptible to it, but intelligent people recognize the phenomenon. To quote S Wonder, "When you believe in things / that you don't understand / then you suffer."
#57
Full Member
With respect, "No **** Sherlock". That's what science tells us -- the components are responsible for the ride quality.
And those people who have told you that, are correct. Please see my preceding response on the topic of "confirmation bias", from which you are also suffering. ( And I use that term loosely -- if it makes you happy to believe in your titanium religion, great, more power to you, everyone wants to be happy... just don't run around proselytizing that nonsense which has long-since been proven to be false. )
Come on guys, this is not rocket science, nor is it even particularly recent science. We have known the properties of these materials and shapes for many years. You are describing fantasy.
Come on guys, this is not rocket science, nor is it even particularly recent science. We have known the properties of these materials and shapes for many years. You are describing fantasy.
Likes For TC1:
#58
Full Member
Ironically, that same "real world" excuse is constantly used by audiophiles to defend their purchase of thousands of dollars of cables that cannot make any audible difference. They almost always fall back on the same story -- "Well I can't explain why all the science says otherwise, but I KNOW I can hear the difference in the real world." It is very difficult, as this thread illustrates, for some people to admit that they've been taken for a ride -- financially and figuratively speaking -- and/or that closely-held beliefs are in-fact nothing but superstition.
#59
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,109
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5035 Post(s)
Liked 8,234 Times
in
3,892 Posts
Hey, big talk from the guy whose pedals apparently grind like a coffee machine.
Ironically, that same "real world" excuse is constantly used by audiophiles to defend their purchase of thousands of dollars of cables that cannot make any audible difference. They almost always fall back on the same story -- "Well I can't explain why all the science says otherwise, but I KNOW I can hear the difference in the real world." It is very difficult, as this thread illustrates, for some people to admit that they've been taken for a ride -- financially and figuratively speaking -- and/or that closely-held beliefs are in-fact nothing but superstition.
Ironically, that same "real world" excuse is constantly used by audiophiles to defend their purchase of thousands of dollars of cables that cannot make any audible difference. They almost always fall back on the same story -- "Well I can't explain why all the science says otherwise, but I KNOW I can hear the difference in the real world." It is very difficult, as this thread illustrates, for some people to admit that they've been taken for a ride -- financially and figuratively speaking -- and/or that closely-held beliefs are in-fact nothing but superstition.
As for speaker wire, I’m a 12ga stranded copper guy. I also believe that Bluetooth does a sufficient job transmitting audio data across the room for my needs. I do spin vinyl records, on occasion, but it’s about the nostalgic ritual of it, not some belief in superior audio quality. I am mildly picky about speaker placement and decent stereo imaging, however.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
#60
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,109
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5035 Post(s)
Liked 8,234 Times
in
3,892 Posts
He took the parts from one frame and put them on another frame. Same parts, different frame, different feel. The parts/components variable is eliminated. The differences might be measurable, but you have to look beyond just vertical compliance data.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
#61
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,126
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1795 Post(s)
Liked 1,642 Times
in
940 Posts
If ever you wondered: "Oh, wow...How can seemingly sane, rational people/person think irrational preposterous thing (X)?" There is almost always a sure-fire guarentee that somewhere along the way a fundamental, foundational concept or critical piece of information that has been missed.
But since TC1 apparently watched a Youtube video once that makes him the one and only sole authority on the matter... And since no one here is as worthy or credible in adding depth of meaning or nuance to the knowledge given with God level authority bestowed upon TC1 by the Youtubes. Here is another video from the only source that TC1 finds credible.
TC1 Here is a bit of news: Nobody is buying a steel or titanium or carbon, or bamboo, or wood, or whatever frame material because of they thought they were buying "vertical compliance" of the frame. That you seem to think that we think "vertical compliance" is the defining characteristic of comfort in spite of all the posts to the contrary says a lot more about you than it does about the collective.
But since TC1 apparently watched a Youtube video once that makes him the one and only sole authority on the matter... And since no one here is as worthy or credible in adding depth of meaning or nuance to the knowledge given with God level authority bestowed upon TC1 by the Youtubes. Here is another video from the only source that TC1 finds credible.
TC1 Here is a bit of news: Nobody is buying a steel or titanium or carbon, or bamboo, or wood, or whatever frame material because of they thought they were buying "vertical compliance" of the frame. That you seem to think that we think "vertical compliance" is the defining characteristic of comfort in spite of all the posts to the contrary says a lot more about you than it does about the collective.
Last edited by base2; 11-07-23 at 11:56 PM.
#62
Full Member
And, for the record, if you believe that your frame is more flexible than your tires even laterally, perform a simple test. Push your thumb into your inflated tire, and see it deflect. Now push secure your frame in a jig, and push your thumb against it -- and see it not deflect.
#63
Full Member
No one has suggested that bicycle frames do not deflect laterally, as shown in your video. That, however, has nothing whatsoever to do with comfort.
Last edited by TC1; 11-07-23 at 11:32 PM.
#64
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,109
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5035 Post(s)
Liked 8,234 Times
in
3,892 Posts
And some people swear they can hear the difference between digital audio sources -- which is also impossible. You could not detect those alleged differences in a double-blind test of your bikes, because they are physically impossible, even if your brain has been completely convinced that your new purchase was miles better than your old one.
The simple fact that you claim there was a significant difference "every time" is evidence enough that you are a victim of confirmation bias -- and there's no shame in that, everyone is susceptible to it, but intelligent people recognize the phenomenon. To quote S Wonder, "When you believe in things / that you don't understand / then you suffer."
The simple fact that you claim there was a significant difference "every time" is evidence enough that you are a victim of confirmation bias -- and there's no shame in that, everyone is susceptible to it, but intelligent people recognize the phenomenon. To quote S Wonder, "When you believe in things / that you don't understand / then you suffer."
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
#65
Full Member
Hmmm... which is likelier to be correct?
#66
Full Member
What you aren’t acknowledging - or are refusing to acknowledge - is that some people may be more sensitive to certain sensations than others. Some of it is related to having enough experience to have a frame of reference to recognize the differences. For people without a frame of reference, it’s easy to just deny that differences exist…and then quote some study that confirms their bias.
Superstition is not a reasonable alternative.
The science remains brutally clear, despite the attempts at superstitious obfuscation. It requires many thousands of Newtons of force to deflect a bicycle frame, and two orders of magnitude less force is required to deflect pneumatic tires to failure. Until and unless your superstition can work its way out of that box, it remains nothing but wishful-thinking. There is no human capable of sensing deflection that cannot happen, despite your hopes, I'm afraid.
Likes For TC1:
#67
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,109
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5035 Post(s)
Liked 8,234 Times
in
3,892 Posts
So what were you talking about when you claimed that pedaling a bicycle induces vibrations that are sufficient to discomfort the rider? I am not aware of any properly-maintained crankset system for which that would be even close to true.
Forces moving the bicycle down the road are irrelevant to comfort. Forces moving the bicycle up off the road are relevant.
And, for the record, if you believe that your frame is more flexible than your tires even laterally, perform a simple test. Push your thumb into your inflated tire, and see it deflect. Now push secure your frame in a jig, and push your thumb against it -- and see it not deflect.
Forces moving the bicycle down the road are irrelevant to comfort. Forces moving the bicycle up off the road are relevant.
And, for the record, if you believe that your frame is more flexible than your tires even laterally, perform a simple test. Push your thumb into your inflated tire, and see it deflect. Now push secure your frame in a jig, and push your thumb against it -- and see it not deflect.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
#68
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: In the south but from North
Posts: 701
Bikes: Turner 5-Spot Burner converted; IBIS Ripley, Specialized Crave, Tommasini Sintesi, Cinelli Superstar, Tommasini X-Fire Gravel
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 406 Post(s)
Liked 389 Times
in
219 Posts
Classic bikeforum thread. God love this site. The most comical thing is the statement that the "science" shows, with the science being single report from a web-site called "Cycling About".
Likes For vespasianus:
#69
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,126
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1795 Post(s)
Liked 1,642 Times
in
940 Posts
Yes, but post-purchase superstition has an amazingly-strong hold on some people, as I just said.
Are you referring to the difference between "vertical" and "lateral"? That's a very "fundamental, foundational" concept and you seem to have missed it.
No one has suggested that bicycle frames do not deflect laterally, as shown in your video. That, however, has nothing whatsoever to do with comfort.
Are you referring to the difference between "vertical" and "lateral"? That's a very "fundamental, foundational" concept and you seem to have missed it.
No one has suggested that bicycle frames do not deflect laterally, as shown in your video. That, however, has nothing whatsoever to do with comfort.
The engineering merits of the double triangle diamond frame leaves little room for "vertical compliance." Lateral and tortional stiffness, however is another matter.
Titanium is very strong. It is also very springy. If a titanium frame were designed only as strong as necessary and only where necessary like a carbon frame tends to be designed, it would be so noodley so as to be dangerous. Consequently, all the supposed weight savings is eaten up by additional material added to address the absence of tortional and lateral stiffness. The end goal/result is often a ride comparable to a steel bike with some weight savings but not as much as *could* be. The trade-off is often cracking sometime far along the life cycle as manufacturing can be difficult to execute and the elasticity of the welds is different than the tube that was welded. (On a general level.)
Carbon, on the other hand, is not so "springy" and it can be very light weight with enough strength to do the job. So, there is a lot of freedom to design around an intended use. Larger diameter down tubes, head tubes, larger bottom bracket areas and thicker chainstays can be done with very little weight penalty. (Conspicuously absent from this tube growth phenomonon is top tubes and seat tubes.)
Carbon, on the other hand, is not so "springy" and it can be very light weight with enough strength to do the job. So, there is a lot of freedom to design around an intended use. Larger diameter down tubes, head tubes, larger bottom bracket areas and thicker chainstays can be done with very little weight penalty. (Conspicuously absent from this tube growth phenomonon is top tubes and seat tubes.)
For "vertical compliance" ie "comfort" in the traditional sense, tires (bigger softer "air springs") and seatpost will yield much more fruit. A longer seat post will offer much more deflection than a short one. You can see this in the recent trend of lower and lower seatpost collars and ever more sloping top tubes in more recent designs.
I think that what a lot of people mean when they repeat: "Steel is real" (& by extension, titanium) is that the frame twists, the quill stem flexes, the side of the handlebar that had weight on it flexed, the bottom bracket deflected, etc...All give the impression of a smoother ride. Whereas a carbon frame by nature of desing is intended to resist those forces so can be perceived as "wooden" by comparison.
Designing flex into a carbon bike has been the latest trend with IsoSpeed, IsoShock, Zertz, decoupled seatposts, etc...
All that is to say, the smaller frame will be smoother not because it is Titanium, but because all the bits that stick out will have room to be flexier.
Last edited by base2; 11-08-23 at 12:36 AM.
Likes For base2:
#70
Full Member
And you keep resorting to ridiculous posts like that one, filled with ad hominem attacks in lieu of any sort of useful contribution.
Likes For TC1:
#71
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,109
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5035 Post(s)
Liked 8,234 Times
in
3,892 Posts
What you are apparently unable to understand is that the "frame of reference" for those people who tell you that the difference does not exist, is science.
Superstition is not a reasonable alternative.
The science remains brutally clear, despite the attempts at superstitious obfuscation. It requires many thousands of Newtons of force to deflect a bicycle frame, and two orders of magnitude less force is required to deflect pneumatic tires to failure. Until and unless your superstition can work its way out of that box, it remains nothing but wishful-thinking. There is no human capable of sensing deflection that cannot happen, despite your hopes, I'm afraid.
Superstition is not a reasonable alternative.
The science remains brutally clear, despite the attempts at superstitious obfuscation. It requires many thousands of Newtons of force to deflect a bicycle frame, and two orders of magnitude less force is required to deflect pneumatic tires to failure. Until and unless your superstition can work its way out of that box, it remains nothing but wishful-thinking. There is no human capable of sensing deflection that cannot happen, despite your hopes, I'm afraid.
Your belief that a frame cannot bend because of tires (or other components) in the pathway between power and ground is another confirmation that you’ve never ridden a bike hard enough make a frame bend.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
#72
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,126
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1795 Post(s)
Liked 1,642 Times
in
940 Posts
Heh. Yeah. I picked that one on purpose.
__________________
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
#73
Full Member
If you were even the slightest bit informed on the topic, and/or had even read that article, you might be aware that the science is vastly more widespread than you suggest -- not that it even needs to be, as one can confirm the findings in their own garage, if need be. But you'll probably insist on clamping your hands over your ears and wailing "I can't hear you", so I'll leave you to your delusions.
Likes For TC1:
#74
Full Member
I did not disagree with all your post #9, that you laboriously quoted, and you'll note that I did not respond to it. Some of it didn't make any sense, but it wasn't worth my time to argue points not germane to my position. For example, you wrote:
I think that what a lot of people mean when they repeat: "Steel is real" (& by extension, titanium) is that the frame twists, the quill stem flexes, the side of the handlebar that had weight on it flexed, the bottom bracket deflected, etc...All give the impression of a smoother ride. Whereas a carbon frame by nature of desing is intended to resist those forces so can be perceived as "wooden" by comparison.
#75
Full Member
And by the way, you're again misrepresenting the situation. "Power" has nothing whatsoever to do with this problem.
Last edited by TC1; 11-08-23 at 10:46 AM.