|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Something I've been wondering about.
On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 3:54:39 PM UTC-7, James wrote:
On 21/3/19 9:09 am, jbeattie wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 1:51:54 PM UTC-7, wrote: Jay, you said that you raced professionally in one of these postings. Was that a joke or were you serious? I raced with professionals on occasion, but I was never a professional -- unless my staggering winnings as an amateur elevate me to pro status. I once won a crate of Kettle chips, some water bottles, prime change and some free swag that everybody got. I got some t-shirts that didn't fit. I suppose that's not good enough to be considered a pro. Same here! And yes, I know about pedaling technique and am tired of hearing about it since it changes every ten minutes -- along with fit. Pedal circles, scrape dog **** off your sole, pedal up and down, etc., etc. I'm waiting for someone to chime in again about the mystical pedaling technique of Jacques Anquetil. We had that long thread about 15-20 years ago with that guy who was going on about Jacques Anquetil. I think he was trying to sell a book. Apparently there are still some dark mysteries about Jacques' pedaling technique. I trained and raced with a fellow who had a very ordinary pedalling style, to the point I've seen his legs stop at the dead spots and cause the freewheel to clunk as his legs start moving again. He won several big races as a masters competitor. I'm too familiar with that clunk. I get tired and pedal squares. -- Jay Beattie. |
Ads |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Something I've been wondering about.
On 3/20/2019 7:34 PM, Mark J. wrote:
On 3/20/2019 2:13 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 3/20/2019 3:42 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 9:25:20 AM UTC-7, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 4:38:21 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:47:58 +1100, James wrote: On 20/3/19 1:16 am, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 7:32:42 AM UTC-4, John B. Slocomb wrote: Last Sunday I was on my usual weekly "long ride" (which was hardly as long as it used to be). And I was sort of looking down and the chain was on the big chain ring and the 5th cassette sprocket (9 speed cassette) and I got to thinking. Note the friction losses for a chain drive are usually considered to be very low, the usual efficiency of a chain drive is usually reckoned to be "up to" 98%. But the instructions for installing a chain drive is always to ensure that the drive and driven sprockets are exactly in line. But the conventional bicycle with it's multiple front and rear sprockets does not have the sprockets aligned except in two instances, assuming the usual chain line dimensions. When on the large front chain ring and (usually) the center cassette sprocket on an uneven numbered cassette, and when on the small front chain ring and a larger cassette sprocket. Perhaps two sprockets larger than center. So, if the usually chain efficiency figures are used the chain is delivering the 98%+ efficiency only twice in a possible 18 speed range. What efficiency is being delivered during the periods when the chain is not perfectly aligned? And should one worry about it? -- Cheers, John B. The short answer is no. The long answer is: The efficiency due to misalignment in a derrailleur/freehub system is negligible, here's why: 1. The 98% efficiency you mentioned is in fixed systems with a drive providing constant smooth torque. 2. Once a freehub system is installed (like a single-speed (NOT fixed gear)), the efficiency depends almost entirely on the the bio-mechanical pedaling efficiency. In other words, if you don't apply even power throughout the pedal stroke, the efficiency of the entire system drops off dramatically, at this point, losses due to chain misalignment are barely measurable, let alone being perceptible by the rider. I believe John is focused on the efficiency of the chain drive system alone, not the biomechanical efficiency of the person plus the chain. Certainly I was... After all one's "pedal stroke" while it can be altered by practice, to an extent, is essentially a down and back power stroke for even the best riders and a sort of "built in" part of one's riding. 3. Make matters worse by introducing a spring tension system. Now in addition to the bio mechanical inefficiencies, you're adding the ability of the chain drive to take up slack in the system, which allows _you_ to pedal even more inefficiently. Here's a graphic representation: https://hanswinter.wordpress.com/200...your-spinscan/ I think that, and the rest of your post is complete ********. Ahh, that may be the common transportation rider pedal stroke but pedaling circles is normal for a high performance rider. Though I can no longer hold it up for long and now reserve it for climbing or sprinting. I always pedal circles because my crank arms describe a circle. If you don't like circles, I recommend: http://tinyurl.com/y2nop9m8 Bad ideas live forever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM Ahh, the Alenax. I always wanted to ride one of those.... once, just to see what it was like. The sheer Rube Goldberg-ness of it amuses me. A friend had a funky crank ?or bottom bracket? that allowed both crank arms to turn, well, semi-independently. Both drove the bike, but neither drove the other, so you had to consciously lift each leg. I believe it was marketed as a training tool (and you could "Alenax" it, with both arms being simultaneously on the downstroke.) Oddly, I never wanted to try /that/. Mark J. Houdaille Power Cam cranks? -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Something I've been wondering about.
On 21/3/19 11:33 am, jbeattie wrote:
I'm too familiar with that clunk. I get tired and pedal squares. You will need square cranks for that. http://pardo.net/bike/pic/mobi/d.pmp-cranks/index.html -- JS |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Something I've been wondering about.
On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 5:13:41 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/20/2019 3:42 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 9:25:20 AM UTC-7, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 4:38:21 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:47:58 +1100, James wrote: On 20/3/19 1:16 am, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 7:32:42 AM UTC-4, John B. Slocomb wrote: Last Sunday I was on my usual weekly "long ride" (which was hardly as long as it used to be). And I was sort of looking down and the chain was on the big chain ring and the 5th cassette sprocket (9 speed cassette) and I got to thinking. Note the friction losses for a chain drive are usually considered to be very low, the usual efficiency of a chain drive is usually reckoned to be "up to" 98%. But the instructions for installing a chain drive is always to ensure that the drive and driven sprockets are exactly in line. But the conventional bicycle with it's multiple front and rear sprockets does not have the sprockets aligned except in two instances, assuming the usual chain line dimensions. When on the large front chain ring and (usually) the center cassette sprocket on an uneven numbered cassette, and when on the small front chain ring and a larger cassette sprocket. Perhaps two sprockets larger than center. So, if the usually chain efficiency figures are used the chain is delivering the 98%+ efficiency only twice in a possible 18 speed range. What efficiency is being delivered during the periods when the chain is not perfectly aligned? And should one worry about it? -- Cheers, John B. The short answer is no. The long answer is: The efficiency due to misalignment in a derrailleur/freehub system is negligible, here's why: 1. The 98% efficiency you mentioned is in fixed systems with a drive providing constant smooth torque. 2. Once a freehub system is installed (like a single-speed (NOT fixed gear)), the efficiency depends almost entirely on the the bio-mechanical pedaling efficiency. In other words, if you don't apply even power throughout the pedal stroke, the efficiency of the entire system drops off dramatically, at this point, losses due to chain misalignment are barely measurable, let alone being perceptible by the rider. I believe John is focused on the efficiency of the chain drive system alone, not the biomechanical efficiency of the person plus the chain. Certainly I was... After all one's "pedal stroke" while it can be altered by practice, to an extent, is essentially a down and back power stroke for even the best riders and a sort of "built in" part of one's riding. 3. Make matters worse by introducing a spring tension system. Now in addition to the bio mechanical inefficiencies, you're adding the ability of the chain drive to take up slack in the system, which allows _you_ to pedal even more inefficiently. Here's a graphic representation: https://hanswinter.wordpress.com/200...your-spinscan/ I think that, and the rest of your post is complete ********. Ahh, that may be the common transportation rider pedal stroke but pedaling circles is normal for a high performance rider. Though I can no longer hold it up for long and now reserve it for climbing or sprinting. I always pedal circles because my crank arms describe a circle. If you don't like circles, I recommend: http://tinyurl.com/y2nop9m8 Bad ideas live forever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Looks like the IDEAL solution for someone who has limited knee motion to be able to still ride an upright bicycle. Cheers |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Something I've been wondering about.
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:42:12 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 5:13:41 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: On 3/20/2019 3:42 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 9:25:20 AM UTC-7, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 4:38:21 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:47:58 +1100, James wrote: On 20/3/19 1:16 am, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 7:32:42 AM UTC-4, John B. Slocomb wrote: Last Sunday I was on my usual weekly "long ride" (which was hardly as long as it used to be). And I was sort of looking down and the chain was on the big chain ring and the 5th cassette sprocket (9 speed cassette) and I got to thinking. Note the friction losses for a chain drive are usually considered to be very low, the usual efficiency of a chain drive is usually reckoned to be "up to" 98%. But the instructions for installing a chain drive is always to ensure that the drive and driven sprockets are exactly in line. But the conventional bicycle with it's multiple front and rear sprockets does not have the sprockets aligned except in two instances, assuming the usual chain line dimensions. When on the large front chain ring and (usually) the center cassette sprocket on an uneven numbered cassette, and when on the small front chain ring and a larger cassette sprocket. Perhaps two sprockets larger than center. So, if the usually chain efficiency figures are used the chain is delivering the 98%+ efficiency only twice in a possible 18 speed range. What efficiency is being delivered during the periods when the chain is not perfectly aligned? And should one worry about it? -- Cheers, John B. The short answer is no. The long answer is: The efficiency due to misalignment in a derrailleur/freehub system is negligible, here's why: 1. The 98% efficiency you mentioned is in fixed systems with a drive providing constant smooth torque. 2. Once a freehub system is installed (like a single-speed (NOT fixed gear)), the efficiency depends almost entirely on the the bio-mechanical pedaling efficiency. In other words, if you don't apply even power throughout the pedal stroke, the efficiency of the entire system drops off dramatically, at this point, losses due to chain misalignment are barely measurable, let alone being perceptible by the rider. I believe John is focused on the efficiency of the chain drive system alone, not the biomechanical efficiency of the person plus the chain. Certainly I was... After all one's "pedal stroke" while it can be altered by practice, to an extent, is essentially a down and back power stroke for even the best riders and a sort of "built in" part of one's riding. 3. Make matters worse by introducing a spring tension system. Now in addition to the bio mechanical inefficiencies, you're adding the ability of the chain drive to take up slack in the system, which allows _you_ to pedal even more inefficiently. Here's a graphic representation: https://hanswinter.wordpress.com/200...your-spinscan/ I think that, and the rest of your post is complete ********. Ahh, that may be the common transportation rider pedal stroke but pedaling circles is normal for a high performance rider. Though I can no longer hold it up for long and now reserve it for climbing or sprinting. I always pedal circles because my crank arms describe a circle. If you don't like circles, I recommend: http://tinyurl.com/y2nop9m8 Bad ideas live forever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Looks like the IDEAL solution for someone who has limited knee motion to be able to still ride an upright bicycle. Cheers There is a guy in the village that has no lower legs. He doesn't ride a bicycle of course but has a tricycle that has two vertical levers attached to some sort of "lower end/pedal arm" mechanism and sort of rows himself along. -- Cheers, John B. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Something I've been wondering about.
John B. Slocomb writes:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:42:12 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 5:13:41 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: On 3/20/2019 3:42 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 9:25:20 AM UTC-7, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 4:38:21 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:47:58 +1100, James wrote: On 20/3/19 1:16 am, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 7:32:42 AM UTC-4, John B. Slocomb wrote: Last Sunday I was on my usual weekly "long ride" (which was hardly as long as it used to be). And I was sort of looking down and the chain was on the big chain ring and the 5th cassette sprocket (9 speed cassette) and I got to thinking. Note the friction losses for a chain drive are usually considered to be very low, the usual efficiency of a chain drive is usually reckoned to be "up to" 98%. But the instructions for installing a chain drive is always to ensure that the drive and driven sprockets are exactly in line. But the conventional bicycle with it's multiple front and rear sprockets does not have the sprockets aligned except in two instances, assuming the usual chain line dimensions. When on the large front chain ring and (usually) the center cassette sprocket on an uneven numbered cassette, and when on the small front chain ring and a larger cassette sprocket. Perhaps two sprockets larger than center. So, if the usually chain efficiency figures are used the chain is delivering the 98%+ efficiency only twice in a possible 18 speed range. What efficiency is being delivered during the periods when the chain is not perfectly aligned? And should one worry about it? -- Cheers, John B. The short answer is no. The long answer is: The efficiency due to misalignment in a derrailleur/freehub system is negligible, here's why: 1. The 98% efficiency you mentioned is in fixed systems with a drive providing constant smooth torque. 2. Once a freehub system is installed (like a single-speed (NOT fixed gear)), the efficiency depends almost entirely on the the bio-mechanical pedaling efficiency. In other words, if you don't apply even power throughout the pedal stroke, the efficiency of the entire system drops off dramatically, at this point, losses due to chain misalignment are barely measurable, let alone being perceptible by the rider. I believe John is focused on the efficiency of the chain drive system alone, not the biomechanical efficiency of the person plus the chain. Certainly I was... After all one's "pedal stroke" while it can be altered by practice, to an extent, is essentially a down and back power stroke for even the best riders and a sort of "built in" part of one's riding. 3. Make matters worse by introducing a spring tension system. Now in addition to the bio mechanical inefficiencies, you're adding the ability of the chain drive to take up slack in the system, which allows _you_ to pedal even more inefficiently. Here's a graphic representation: https://hanswinter.wordpress.com/200...your-spinscan/ I think that, and the rest of your post is complete ********. Ahh, that may be the common transportation rider pedal stroke but pedaling circles is normal for a high performance rider. Though I can no longer hold it up for long and now reserve it for climbing or sprinting. I always pedal circles because my crank arms describe a circle. If you don't like circles, I recommend: http://tinyurl.com/y2nop9m8 Bad ideas live forever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Looks like the IDEAL solution for someone who has limited knee motion to be able to still ride an upright bicycle. Cheers There is a guy in the village that has no lower legs. He doesn't ride a bicycle of course but has a tricycle that has two vertical levers attached to some sort of "lower end/pedal arm" mechanism and sort of rows himself along. With his hands? The only handcycles I've seen all use a circular motion, like normal pedal cycles. But I'm sure that doesn't work for everyone. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Something I've been wondering about.
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 10:23:21 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote: John B. Slocomb writes: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:42:12 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 5:13:41 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: On 3/20/2019 3:42 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 9:25:20 AM UTC-7, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 4:38:21 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:47:58 +1100, James wrote: On 20/3/19 1:16 am, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 7:32:42 AM UTC-4, John B. Slocomb wrote: Last Sunday I was on my usual weekly "long ride" (which was hardly as long as it used to be). And I was sort of looking down and the chain was on the big chain ring and the 5th cassette sprocket (9 speed cassette) and I got to thinking. Note the friction losses for a chain drive are usually considered to be very low, the usual efficiency of a chain drive is usually reckoned to be "up to" 98%. But the instructions for installing a chain drive is always to ensure that the drive and driven sprockets are exactly in line. But the conventional bicycle with it's multiple front and rear sprockets does not have the sprockets aligned except in two instances, assuming the usual chain line dimensions. When on the large front chain ring and (usually) the center cassette sprocket on an uneven numbered cassette, and when on the small front chain ring and a larger cassette sprocket. Perhaps two sprockets larger than center. So, if the usually chain efficiency figures are used the chain is delivering the 98%+ efficiency only twice in a possible 18 speed range. What efficiency is being delivered during the periods when the chain is not perfectly aligned? And should one worry about it? -- Cheers, John B. The short answer is no. The long answer is: The efficiency due to misalignment in a derrailleur/freehub system is negligible, here's why: 1. The 98% efficiency you mentioned is in fixed systems with a drive providing constant smooth torque. 2. Once a freehub system is installed (like a single-speed (NOT fixed gear)), the efficiency depends almost entirely on the the bio-mechanical pedaling efficiency. In other words, if you don't apply even power throughout the pedal stroke, the efficiency of the entire system drops off dramatically, at this point, losses due to chain misalignment are barely measurable, let alone being perceptible by the rider. I believe John is focused on the efficiency of the chain drive system alone, not the biomechanical efficiency of the person plus the chain. Certainly I was... After all one's "pedal stroke" while it can be altered by practice, to an extent, is essentially a down and back power stroke for even the best riders and a sort of "built in" part of one's riding. 3. Make matters worse by introducing a spring tension system. Now in addition to the bio mechanical inefficiencies, you're adding the ability of the chain drive to take up slack in the system, which allows _you_ to pedal even more inefficiently. Here's a graphic representation: https://hanswinter.wordpress.com/200...your-spinscan/ I think that, and the rest of your post is complete ********. Ahh, that may be the common transportation rider pedal stroke but pedaling circles is normal for a high performance rider. Though I can no longer hold it up for long and now reserve it for climbing or sprinting. I always pedal circles because my crank arms describe a circle. If you don't like circles, I recommend: http://tinyurl.com/y2nop9m8 Bad ideas live forever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Looks like the IDEAL solution for someone who has limited knee motion to be able to still ride an upright bicycle. Cheers There is a guy in the village that has no lower legs. He doesn't ride a bicycle of course but has a tricycle that has two vertical levers attached to some sort of "lower end/pedal arm" mechanism and sort of rows himself along. With his hands? The only handcycles I've seen all use a circular motion, like normal pedal cycles. But I'm sure that doesn't work for everyone. Yup. the "oars" are vertical levers pivoted perhaps 1 foot above the bottom of the lever and that lower end is connected to what seems to be a conventional BB through horizontal arms. He seems to pull one lever and than the other. I've only seen him a couple of times and I'm not sure how he steers the thing. -- Cheers, John B. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Something I've been wondering about.
On 3/20/2019 5:36 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/20/2019 7:34 PM, Mark J. wrote: On 3/20/2019 2:13 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 3/20/2019 3:42 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 9:25:20 AM UTC-7, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 4:38:21 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:47:58 +1100, James wrote: On 20/3/19 1:16 am, wrote: On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 7:32:42 AM UTC-4, John B. Slocomb wrote: Last Sunday I was on my usual weekly "long ride" (which was hardly as long as it used to be). And I was sort of looking down and the chain was on the big chain ring and the 5th cassette sprocket (9 speed cassette) and I got to thinking. Note the friction losses for a chain drive are usually considered to be very low, the usual efficiency of a chain drive is usually reckoned to be "up to" 98%. But the instructions for installing a chain drive is always to ensure that the drive and driven sprockets are exactly in line. But the conventional bicycle with it's multiple front and rear sprockets does not have the sprockets aligned except in two instances, assuming the usual chain line dimensions. When on the large front chain ring and (usually) the center cassette sprocket on an uneven numbered cassette, and when on the small front chain ring and a larger cassette sprocket. Perhaps two sprockets larger than center. So, if the usually chain efficiency figures are used the chain is delivering the 98%+ efficiency only twice in a possible 18 speed range. What efficiency is being delivered during the periods when the chain is not perfectly aligned? And should one worry about it? -- Cheers, John B. The short answer is no. The long answer is: The efficiency due to misalignment in a derrailleur/freehub system is negligible, here's why: 1. The 98% efficiency you mentioned is in fixed systems with a drive providing constant smooth torque. 2. Once a freehub system is installed (like a single-speed (NOT fixed gear)), the efficiency depends almost entirely on the the bio-mechanical pedaling efficiency.ÂÂ* In other words, if you don't apply even power throughout the pedal stroke, the efficiency of the entire system drops off dramatically, at this point, losses due to chain misalignment are barely measurable, let alone being perceptible by the rider. I believe John is focused on the efficiency of the chain drive system alone, not the biomechanical efficiency of the person plus the chain. Certainly I was... After all one's "pedal stroke" while it can be altered by practice, to an extent, is essentially a down and back power stroke for even the best riders and a sort of "built in" part of one's riding. 3. Make matters worse by introducing a spring tension system. Now in addition to the bio mechanical inefficiencies, you're adding the ability of the chain drive to take up slack in the system, which allows _you_ to pedal even more inefficiently. Here's a graphic representation: https://hanswinter.wordpress.com/200...your-spinscan/ I think that, and the rest of your post is complete ********. Ahh, that may be the common transportation rider pedal stroke but pedaling circles is normal for a high performance rider. Though I can no longer hold it up for long and now reserve it for climbing or sprinting. I always pedal circles because my crank arms describe a circle.ÂÂ* If you don't like circles, I recommend: http://tinyurl.com/y2nop9m8 Bad ideas live forever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM Ahh, the Alenax.Â* I always wanted to ride one of those.... once, just to see what it was like.Â* The sheer Rube Goldberg-ness of it amuses me. A friend had a funky crank ?or bottom bracket? that allowed both crank arms to turn, well, semi-independently.Â* Both drove the bike, but neither drove the other, so you had to consciously lift each leg.Â* I believe it was marketed as a training tool (and you could "Alenax" it, with both arms being simultaneously on the downstroke.)Â* Oddly, I never wanted to try /that/. Mark J. Houdaille Power Cam cranks? Yes, that name rings a bell. Mark J. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Something I've been wondering about.
On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 2:22:30 PM UTC-7, James wrote:
Todd Carver says but provides no proof. I have looked pretty carefully into this. On very hard climbs pedaling circles allows you to maintain your headway. I suppose in that way it can save power as opposed to just pushing down. But I find that when comparing myself to people I ride with that do not pedal circles that we seem to get tired at the same time. Pulling up is using O2 and lactase in the same manner as pushing down harder. Now as I get more fit, I can ride a little faster but that is probably from the reduced effort of not having to re-accelerate with every pedal stroke. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Just wondering | Davey Crockett[_13_] | Racing | 3 | July 24th 17 10:35 AM |
Just wondering | The UniSLAB | Unicycling | 5 | August 11th 07 05:51 PM |
just wondering???? | rem48 | Unicycling | 11 | August 6th 07 08:56 PM |
Been Wondering Where Tam Is?? | Gags | Australia | 13 | June 25th 07 10:10 PM |
Just wondering | Terri | Rides | 1 | June 23rd 06 06:38 PM |