Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 09-04-2013, 05:22 AM   #1
Bus Nut
 
CHEESE_WAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 401
Year: None
Coachwork: None
Chassis: None
Engine: None
Rated Cap: None
Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

As it becomes obvious to me that my current Pace Arrow will suffer the same fate of a failed roof as my 28-footer, I contemplate using the two for parts to build a bus when I have the time and money to do so. However, on reflection, there were some things about the Ford-chassis Blue Bird I previously owned that I found I didn't particularly care for...

1) - The Lucas-Girling hydraulic brake system. JUNK. Absolute, unadulterated, JUNK. Are they still built this way, and if not, when did they stop? While I have no real preference (my understanding is that CDL is not required for motorhomes, even if they have air brakes), when I go bus shopping, I will only buy a Ford-chassis with air-brakes.

2) - The utter inaccessibility of the engine, due to the conventional-type hood arrangement. Therefore, again, while I have no real preference, my criteria for a dog-nose is a one-piece tilt-forward nose, like a semi.

3) - The standard height roof and short rear door through which I routinely entered and exited. I know these things are designed for kids, who generally aren't as tall as adults, but I remember reading that some buses came factory with a higher roof, and I have noticed that many newer ones have a taller rear door, as well as additional side doors. Do only certain manufacturers build this way?

I would like to hear from others on what manufacturers and chassis I should stay away from, as well as any thoughts on the pros and cons of flat-nose buses vs dog-noses, and conventional powertrain/drivetrain layouts, vs pushers.
__________________
"Cheese Wagon" <anomaly.va@gmail.com>

Former owner - 1989 Ford B700 64-pass Blue Bird (Rest In Peace, Cheese Wagon)
CHEESE_WAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2013, 09:48 AM   #2
Bus Crazy
 
somewhereinusa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Andrews,Indiana
Posts: 2,072
Year: 1991
Coachwork: Bluebird
Chassis: AARE
Engine: 3116 Cat 250hp
Rated Cap: Just the two of us.
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Quote:
1) - The Lucas-Girling hydraulic brake system. JUNK. Absolute, unadulterated, JUNK. Are they still built this way, and if not, when did they stop? While I have no real preference (my understanding is that CDL is not required for motorhomes, even if they have air brakes), when I go bus shopping, if it is a Ford-chassis, it will be air-brake ONLY.
How old was that thing, I don't think Ford has done this for quite some time.

Quote:
2) - The utter inaccessibility of the engine, due to the conventional-type hood arrangement. Therefore, again, while I have no real preference, my criteria for a dog-nose is a one-piece tilt-forward nose, like a semi.
Here again, I think that newer might be better and more likely to have a tilt hood. I think you will also find that the tilt hood may not help all that much since much of the engine may be back further than the firewall with an engine cover inside. Those that have them can better address that. I myself like a Bluebird pusher, the whole back end opens, I believe Thomas is built that way also. I have seen IC's that only had a smaller door in the middle that opened. I can stand on the ground and work on pretty much anything and don't even have to crawl over the tires. The only real things in the way are things I put there.


Quote:
3) - The standard height roof and short rear door through which I routinely entered and exited. I know these things are designed for kids, who generally aren't as tall as adults, but I remember reading that some buses came factory with a higher roof, and I have noticed that many newer ones have a taller rear door, as well as additional side doors. Do only certain manufacturers build this way?
Thomas and Bluebird both had three different roof heights, I don't know about the others. You just have to look around. I don't know what year, but both of those manufacturers have quit offering anything but the tall ones. I think that the side door exit and placement is probably by individual school corporation and or state requirements.

Quote:
pros and cons of flat-nose buses vs dog-noses, and conventional powertrain/drivetrain layouts, vs pushers.

THIS IS ONLY MY OPINION.

Pros to RE(pusher)
noise is "back there" I can hardly hear mine running.
more interior room compared to overall length of bus
no long driveshaft taking up valuable under bus space
better ride
easier to work on
better overall driver viewing area
wider straight entry steps
no engine cowl to have to get around to get to driver seat.

Pros to conventional
looks like a school bus ???

Dick
somewhereinusa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2013, 10:04 AM   #3
Bus Nut
 
wmkbailey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Frederick Maryland
Posts: 831
Year: 1999
Coachwork: Thomas
Engine: 3126
Rated Cap: 72
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Ditto what Somewhere said.
__________________
William

visvi Cherokee for Journey, Sounds Like Oeesha

http://thejourneyvisvi.com/

My Conversion Thread:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=464989
wmkbailey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2013, 06:39 PM   #4
Bus Nut
 
CHEESE_WAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 401
Year: None
Coachwork: None
Chassis: None
Engine: None
Rated Cap: None
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by somewhereinusa
Quote:
1) - The Lucas-Girling hydraulic brake system. JUNK. Absolute, unadulterated, JUNK. Are they still built this way, and if not, when did they stop? While I have no real preference (my understanding is that CDL is not required for motorhomes, even if they have air brakes), when I go bus shopping, if it is a Ford-chassis, it will be air-brake ONLY.
How old was that thing, I don't think Ford has done this for quite some time.
It was an '89 model. I drove a '96 F650 box truck that had this junk on it as well, and I have not heard of hydraulic-brake Fords being built any other way. Hydro-boost, I can understand to a degree because of diesel engine options, but why not just have a simple engine-driven vacuum pump? :P
__________________
"Cheese Wagon" <anomaly.va@gmail.com>

Former owner - 1989 Ford B700 64-pass Blue Bird (Rest In Peace, Cheese Wagon)
CHEESE_WAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2013, 02:29 AM   #5
Mini-Skoolie
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 37
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Bluebird
Chassis: All American RE
Engine: Cummins 8.3
Rated Cap: 90
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

I'd personally prefer the pusher for the reasons mentioned above, but I can think of two other commonly referenced pros of the front engine configurations: they are more capable off road, due to more ground clearance and shorter wheelbase, and they drive pretty much like any other truck, while the feeling of being so far in front of the front axle(as in the long pushers and especially coaches)is hard for some people to get used to.
__________________
My build:

http://www.skoolie.net/forums/showthread.php?t=10085
JDecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2013, 12:34 PM   #6
Bus Crazy
 
Diesel Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,489
Year: 1996
Coachwork: Thomas
Chassis: International
Engine: DT466/AT545
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

One advantage of a front engine bus that hasn't been mentioned here is the capacity for hauling cargo. I deliberately left my center aisle completely unobstructed front to back (except for a door that separates a rear utility/bath room, but can be opened). So I can load very long pieces of material into the bus. For instance, I am about to install gutters on my house, and will be able to easily load the gutters into my bus. Also, I can fit 8x4 sheets of plywood, drywall, insulation, or whatever, through the rear door. Other people have modified the rear end of their front-engine buses to enable the whole rear section to fold down as a ramp so a vehicle can be loaded in there.
__________________
Gallery:
http://www.skoolie.net/gallery/v/Skooli ... l_dan_bus/
Conversion Thread:
viewtopic.php?t=4959
Diesel Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2013, 02:52 PM   #7
Bus Geek
 
bansil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: MNT CITY TN
Posts: 5,158
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel Dan
One advantage of a front engine bus that hasn't been mentioned here is the capacity for hauling cargo. I deliberately left my center aisle completely unobstructed front to back (except for a door that separates a rear utility/bath room, but can be opened). So I can load very long pieces of material into the bus. For instance, I am about to install gutters in my house, and will be able to easily load the gutters into my bus. Also, I can fit 8x4 sheets of plywood, drywall, insulation, or whatever, through the rear door. Other people have modified the rear end of their front-engine buses to enable the whole rear section to fold down as a ramp so a vehicle can be loaded in there.
X2 it is nice to have 20/24 foot pcs of metal instead of cutting it down
__________________
Our build La Tortuga
Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
George S. Patton
bansil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2013, 07:04 PM   #8
Bus Nut
 
CHEESE_WAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 401
Year: None
Coachwork: None
Chassis: None
Engine: None
Rated Cap: None
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Well, they are, after all, medium duty dog-nose/cabover truck chassis at their basics...
__________________
"Cheese Wagon" <anomaly.va@gmail.com>

Former owner - 1989 Ford B700 64-pass Blue Bird (Rest In Peace, Cheese Wagon)
CHEESE_WAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2013, 11:38 PM   #9
Bus Nut
 
syke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: from: Prescott, AZ currently: Denver, CO
Posts: 469
Year: 1992
Coachwork: BlueBird
Chassis: All American RE
Engine: 8.3 Cummins
Rated Cap: 72
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Pusher.... just sayin.
__________________
Ryan
Bluebird All American RE: Great White Buffalo (gone but not forgotten)
Our build thread: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10065
syke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2013, 12:40 PM   #10
Bus Nut
 
Skunky Bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Council Bluffs, Iowa
Posts: 417
Year: 1976
Coachwork: Wayne
Chassis: Dodge S-600
Engine: 360 V8
Rated Cap: 66
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by somewhereinusa
Pros to RE(pusher)
noise is "back there" I can hardly hear mine running.
more interior room compared to overall length of bus
no long driveshaft taking up valuable under bus space
better ride
easier to work on
better overall driver viewing area
wider straight entry steps
no engine cowl to have to get around to get to driver seat.
One aspect of the dog-nose that may be a factor for some folks: driving position. The ones I've sat in are enough like my Class C that I'd have to take a tape measure to notice differences in seat height and steering-wheel angle. The flat-nose models I've seen (especially older models) have a more horizontal steering wheel and lower instrument panel. I'm sure I wouldn't like that as much. If I were going for a flat-nose I'd probably want a pusher for the reasons Dick/Somewhere mentioned, esp. the dang doghouse on FE bodies is bigger than my Class C and in the way of my 3-1/2 feet of legs. Could be that some flat-noses have steering-wheel angle more to my liking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by somewhereinusa
Pros to conventional
looks like a school bus ???

Dick
I like that school-bus look. Some folks hate it.
__________________
Any action for which there is no logical explanation will be deemed "company policy."
- Akvol's Second Law of the Corporation
Skunky Bus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2013, 12:48 PM   #11
Bus Nut
 
CHEESE_WAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 401
Year: None
Coachwork: None
Chassis: None
Engine: None
Rated Cap: None
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by somewhereinusa
Pros to conventional
looks like a school bus ???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skunky Bus
I like that school-bus look. Some folks hate it.
As do I... Guess it's because I grew up with conventional dog-nose gassers ... Loved the look of my old '89 Ford B-series... Too bad I had to get rid of her. Found out it had a brand-new 429 Jasper engine with probably <10k on it. Probably for the better though... It had the crappy Lucas-Girling brakes...
__________________
"Cheese Wagon" <anomaly.va@gmail.com>

Former owner - 1989 Ford B700 64-pass Blue Bird (Rest In Peace, Cheese Wagon)
CHEESE_WAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2013, 03:06 PM   #12
Bus Nut
 
bapos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Cleburne TX
Posts: 646
Year: 2001
Chassis: International Amtran RE
Engine: DT466E/MD3060
Rated Cap: 78
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

That's sucks about your bus having to be gotten rid of. That would be a nice motor to put in a lot of things if your a Ford guy? Things happen for a reason....do as you did move on to better things.
bapos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2013, 03:14 PM   #13
Bus Nut
 
CHEESE_WAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 401
Year: None
Coachwork: None
Chassis: None
Engine: None
Rated Cap: None
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Yeah, kinda thinking about a flat-nose, pusher or not. I really dig the old dog-nose gassers but I suspect that being hard to find will be the least of my problems at this point, and I kinda like the better maneuverability of having the steering axle under/behind you...
__________________
"Cheese Wagon" <anomaly.va@gmail.com>

Former owner - 1989 Ford B700 64-pass Blue Bird (Rest In Peace, Cheese Wagon)
CHEESE_WAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2013, 06:06 PM   #14
Bus Nut
 
bapos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Cleburne TX
Posts: 646
Year: 2001
Chassis: International Amtran RE
Engine: DT466E/MD3060
Rated Cap: 78
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

I agree on all counts. I think if I had to do it all over again I would do a BB flat nose rear engine just do to the space.
bapos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2013, 08:32 PM   #15
Bus Crazy
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New England
Posts: 1,009
Year: 1993
Coachwork: Ward Genesis
Chassis: International
Engine: DT466/MT643
Rated Cap: 77
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHEESE_WAGON
Quote:
Originally Posted by somewhereinusa
Quote:
1) - The Lucas-Girling hydraulic brake system. JUNK. Absolute, unadulterated, JUNK. Are they still built this way, and if not, when did they stop? While I have no real preference (my understanding is that CDL is not required for motorhomes, even if they have air brakes), when I go bus shopping, if it is a Ford-chassis, it will be air-brake ONLY.
How old was that thing, I don't think Ford has done this for quite some time.
It was an '89 model. I drove a '96 F650 box truck that had this junk on it as well, and I have not heard of hydraulic-brake Fords being built any other way. Hydro-boost, I can understand to a degree because of diesel engine options, but why not just have a simple engine-driven vacuum pump? :P
IIRC, Ford used the L-G brakes until the cabs changed for 1999. Not just Ford, either: some Freightliners also did...all I have seen were smaller shuttle bus/delivery truck type chassis. Good idea, but the reality of it SUCKED!

Regarding the tilt-front, I think all Internationals since the early 70's had that...so did some Fords and GMC's. (My B700 had a tilt hood.)
__________________
Jarlaxle
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimism is a mental disorder.
Jarlaxle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2013, 08:33 PM   #16
Bus Crazy
 
Elliot Naess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Clearlake, Northern California
Posts: 2,271
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Blue Bird
Chassis: TC-2000 Frt Eng, Tranny:MT643
Engine: 5,9 Cummins
Rated Cap: 84
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

I urge anyone to avoid "forward control" buses. Also known as "flat nose, front engine". That is, the engine inside right next to the driver. I have one, and it is pretty much impossible to do any repair on the left side of the engine -- and that's where much of the stuff that needs repair is located.

So pusher in general, or conventional if you must have a rear cargo opening.
__________________
Elliot
Millicent The Bus - roof raised two feet, toy-hauler tailgate.
http://www.skoolie.net/forums/f11/th...gate-1564.html
Elliot Naess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2013, 07:01 AM   #17
Bus Nut
 
CHEESE_WAGON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 401
Year: None
Coachwork: None
Chassis: None
Engine: None
Rated Cap: None
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarlaxle
Regarding the tilt-front, I think all Internationals since the early 70's had that...so did some Fords and GMC's. (My B700 had a tilt hood.)
Yes, I remember discussing this with other Ford-chassis owners in my former (and extensive) stint here... I find it strange that other B700s, B600s, and B800s, all seemed to have no rhyme or reason as to conventional-hood style versus a tilt-nose. I saw older B600s that had a tilt-nose, and I saw newer B700s that had a conventional hood.

Personally, I think I just had a battle-scarred bus with a nose transplant from an older F-600/700/800 truck with the conventional hood. It didn't appear to have ever been wrecked though. The odometer read 057xxx, (and yes, it was a six-digit odo) but I believe more like 1,050,xxx - Alluding mainly to the replacement engine. Stands to reason that at some point a factory tilt hood might have been replaced with a conventional-type for lack of funds to order a replacement. "Eh... We've got an '82 sitting back here with a blown engine, let's just swap the nose."

Other than the tilt versus conventional variance, they look the same. And then again, it may have just been an option preference that some Ford chassis were shipped with, others not. I'm honestly wondering if it was an air brake versus hydraulic brake thing. Come to think of it, I've seen one with a 370 gasser and air brakes, with a tilt-nose. I'm not quite sure why that would make the difference, (or why a gasser would be ordered with air brakes) but if anyone can confirm that, would be interesting to know.
__________________
"Cheese Wagon" <anomaly.va@gmail.com>

Former owner - 1989 Ford B700 64-pass Blue Bird (Rest In Peace, Cheese Wagon)
CHEESE_WAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2013, 11:53 PM   #18
Site Team
 
crazycal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NUNYA
Posts: 4,234
Year: 1995
Coachwork: Thomas
Chassis: 3800
Engine: DT408, AT545
Rated Cap: 23 500 gvw
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

I've had all three. Flat front rear engine, flat front front engine and a dog nose. My favorite to drive is my International flat front front engine. I've hauled a LOT of crap with it. That's why I bought it. It's 30 feet long with a 13 1/2 foot wheelbase. It drives like a Honda. It is not as quite as the rear engine. The trans sucks(AT545) but I'm still happy I have it. The 40 foot BBAA rear engine is to long for around town driving and many state and fed parks have length restrictions. Elliot is right about being more difficult to work on.
__________________
I'm hungry!

You Gotta Let Me Fly
crazycal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2014, 07:28 AM   #19
Bus Geek
 
EastCoastCB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Eustis FLORIDA
Posts: 19,287
Year: 1999
Coachwork: Thomas
Chassis: Freighliner FS65
Engine: Cat 3126
Rated Cap: 15
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHEESE_WAGON
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarlaxle
Regarding the tilt-front, I think all Internationals since the early 70's had that...so did some Fords and GMC's. (My B700 had a tilt hood.)
Yes, I remember discussing this with other Ford-chassis owners in my former (and extensive) stint here... I find it strange that other B700s, B600s, and B800s, all seemed to have no rhyme or reason as to conventional-hood style versus a tilt-nose. I saw older B600s that had a tilt-nose, and I saw newer B700s that had a conventional hood.

Personally, I think I just had a battle-scarred bus with a nose transplant from an older F-600/700/800 truck with the conventional hood. It didn't appear to have ever been wrecked though. The odometer read 057xxx, (and yes, it was a six-digit odo) but I believe more like 1,050,xxx - Alluding mainly to the replacement engine. Stands to reason that at some point a factory tilt hood might have been replaced with a conventional-type for lack of funds to order a replacement. "Eh... We've got an '82 sitting back here with a blown engine, let's just swap the nose."

Other than the tilt versus conventional variance, they look the same. And then again, it may have just been an option preference that some Ford chassis were shipped with, others not. I'm honestly wondering if it was an air brake versus hydraulic brake thing. Come to think of it, I've seen one with a 370 gasser and air brakes, with a tilt-nose. I'm not quite sure why that would make the difference, (or why a gasser would be ordered with air brakes) but if anyone can confirm that, would be interesting to know.
My mid-80's Ford had a conventional hood. It was all original. It was probably a manufacturer thing like the International front ends on IC buses vs bluebirds back in the early 2000's. My bus was a Thomas.
__________________
.
Roll Your Own Build Thread
EastCoastCB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2014, 11:17 AM   #20
Bus Geek
 
lornaschinske's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Roswell, NM
Posts: 3,587
Year: 1986
Coachwork: BlueBird
Chassis: 40 ft All American FE
Engine: 8.2LTA Fuel Pincher DD V8
Rated Cap: 89
Re: Dog-Nose? Flat-Nose? Conventional? Pusher?

I prefer the looks of the Flat-Nose Blue Bird. Since David got his choice on our first bus, he said I got to choose the second bus (a fact I reminded him that HE said when he decided the Eagle wasn't going to work ). My favourite RV is a pre-1987 Blue Bird Wanderlodge. After 1986, the Wanderlodges started looking like every other RV on the highway. Our All American is a FE. The Eagle had a rear engine and while it was easy to get to, I did not like the single entry point. It is hard to get normal sized appliances in/or the narrow entrance door. With the pusher we HAD to use a emergency hatch/window to escape the rear section of the bus. With a rear emergency door (we kept access to ours), we can, and have, loaded/unloaded all our appliances. For our purposes and use, the front engine is what we prefer. As for the Flat-Nose... that was purely for looks. And I getting too old to be climbing up a ladder to clean the windshield. One size, or one style, does not fit all.
__________________
This post is my opinion. It is not intended to influence anyone's judgment nor do I advocate anyone do what I propose.
Fulltime since 2006
The goal of life is living in agreement with nature. Zeno (335BC-264BC)
http://lorndavi.wordpress.com/blog/
http://i570.photobucket.com/albums/s...ps0340a6ff.jpg
lornaschinske is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
front vs rear engine? (flat nose) dan-fox Conversion General Discussions 8 12-04-2014 08:52 PM
Mid size Blue Bird flat-nose Das Mel Classifieds | Buy, Sell, Swap 10 05-30-2013 02:53 PM
Flat nose seen on I87 in NY state dgorila1 Skoolie Conversion Projects 0 08-03-2012 10:40 AM
93 Thompson body flat nose wiring fireman Skoolie Conversion Projects 8 04-24-2011 12:49 PM
Engine noise on a flat nose jugganaut Conversion General Discussions 15 10-04-2010 11:05 PM

» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×