01:21:03pm, Tuesday, April 16, 2024
|
proposed new itpa class
|
There is a new class being proposed to the ITPA for next year.
It would be called 6850 Light Pro Farm. Basic overview of the rules: 380 cid ,1% tolerance diesel only 3000rpm single 2.6 smooth bore charger water injection (no alcohol) no cooling of water on the tractor no intercoolers ,aftercoolers, or ice boxes full safety equipment factory replacement engines allowed 18.4-38 tires or metric equivalents, radials allowed, any cut allowed No billet heads or blocks Recast heads allowed as long as external OEM dimensions maintained Aftermarket manifolds allowed (no spacer plates) 1" thick max adapter plate between engine block and clutch/trans housing 2 valves per cylinder max P7100 series pump max allowed (13mm diameter plunger allowed max, 1 plunger per cylinder) profab/scs allowed as long is in stock transmission housing. ag rearend/trans (must match) no component tractors - tube frame rails allowed This isn't all of the rules obviously but a good overview. There is a lot of interest and several committed already Just wanted to put this out there to anyone who might be interested or have a tractor already close to meeting these criteria email me at tromine@mchsi.com for further rules or questions or ask right here on the forum. Thank You |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
jd4020
|
look at the classic super stock from ohio close to the same rules you have there |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
G705
|
Some similarities there but 531 cubes and I didn't see an rpm limit. 2 monster differences.
Have seen those guys at Gordyville, there is no comparison, plus we are in Illinois. This is a small cube diesel class.We will be no where near those guys' horsepower... |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class. Why not allow gas like IPA?
|
jeffl
|
IPA allows gas tractors in a similar class.
It would open it up to many different older models of tractors. May be more economical, gas carb is cheaper than diesel injection pump. If gas has more hp let them run smaller cubes or smaller turbo. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Forgive me if I am wrong but wasn't this class proposed last year? |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
G705
|
class proposed last year I believe was 7800lbs and 410 cubes, and 2.5 turbo.
Was some other differences as well.... As far as spacer plates, that is ITPA rule they want. their opinion is if you need spacer plate, just make manifold mounting thicker (all one piece) |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
You're right. Now that you say that I remember that. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 11/11/2017 Posts: 150 |
Looks very similar to the IPA 6500 outlaw diesels, and the ISP 7000# limited turbo diesels mixed in with the 7000 NA Superstocks. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 01/10/2016 Posts: 183 |
What is the goal of this class? To get more tractor at a show? To be an entry level class so cheaper? Just curious. It seems like if you have a tractor in an existing class some one will make a new class just different enough that you can pull with them. Originally being from IL. I would love to be able to take my LLSS down home for a couple weekends and play. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
G705
|
This class would be viewed and marketed as an entry level class.
ITPA has a little bit of a gap in their classes. They go from antiques/classics up to 8500 limited pro with nothing in between. Once u build and run this class and want to go up there are all kinds of options. If you are in this class and want more toys, move up. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Lol move up
|
Just ask the 9500 farmstock class how that works out. A few wanted more toys but instead of moving up they changed the class... Good luck! |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
G705
|
There will be challenges in the future, no doubt on that one. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 01/10/2016 Posts: 183 |
I believe the goal of keeping pulling alive is to have as many people attend the pulls as possible. I pull both sanction and brush pulls and the pulls with most tractors tend to be most successful. Fans want to see lots of tractors and they also like speed. Nothing is more frustrating than not being able to run at pull because someone made rules that are different from all the surrounding groups. I can pull with WTPA but can't pull with Badger State because I have 30.5 tires. I guess I need to by 2 sets of tires and rims. Boy that keeps cost down. In my opinion the proposed class is almost the same as LLSS class that NTPA has. Why not copy them. Good luck and Happy Thanksgiving |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Posts: 513 |
ECIPA has a 360 Hot Stock class, 7,700lbs, 360 cubes, 18.4 any cut tires, 3500rpms. Lots of color and a "cheap" class which is growing by 2-3 tractors a year. --- 
|
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 02/23/2012 Posts: 542 |
We need that in Ohio it would take off real quick |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
A.p.
|
Why would aftermarket (fabricated?) manifolds be allowed, but spacer plates are not? If you allow one, why not the other?
Color me Curious. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
there is a lot to be curious of when looking at itpa ....... never seen a bunch of guys so scared of an intercooler...... |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Another thought
|
Instead of yet another single turbo diesel class, why not a light limited super class? |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Dave k
|
Not scared of intercoolers,it's about lowering the cost of building the tractor. Both farm stock classes went downhill after they took out the 2.25 intake restrictor. As far as LLSS absolutely Itpa needs this class I know of two tractors setting in sheds that could be brought out to compete in this class. |
|
I am going to say this
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
I know I will probably offend someone and don't mean to but as long as I have been pulling ITPA(for 20+ years), I have never asked them for a new class. So why don't you build for the classes that are already in ITPA? |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Where are the new builds coming from?
|
Because it takes $20K to go 6 mph. I hear several ITPA members ask the same question, but have you looked at any other class that ITPA has to offer to see what it takes to start a build. If you ground up an antique or classic and you want to be competitive it takes that $20K. The next jump is 85 LP and it is in the $45 ish range. 86% of the current ITPA competitors are on/in a vehicle that has evolved with the class. What would it cost to build the Supertiquer from the ground up today? You have a very competitive tractor built and you built the tractor over 25 years ago and have made improvements as evolution required it. Most of ITPA's competitors are either 30+ year members or a second generation that inherited a ride. How would anyone expect someone who thinks they like tractor pulling to join ITPA and invest $50K in a vehicle just to "try it." GN in a State level doesn't work as it did years ago. Just look at the reality. The heavy mod has 3 competitors in it regularly but they won't let it die a natural death. So keep a class that only brings you 3 memberships and 4(?) hooks or attempt to bring in something new that will bring you totally new blood? Heavy supers, 2 genuine heavy supers, the balance of the class is filled with 85 Limited Pros. The top 5 in Heavy Super were the 2 genuine Supers the other 3 were 85 limited pros that weren't in the top 5 of the class the vehicle was built for. I could go on and on. But eventually the 4th generation will run out of interest and money for the level of tractor pulling ITPA is trying to maintain and everyone will wonder what happened. But feel free to ask the question, alot of people do because they can't see beyond their own class. But by all means, let's not look at anything new. Let's keep GN classes that GN tractors in our own state don't even bring their tractors to our events (Pro Stock) and give the impression to anyone who doesn't want a Pro Stock or a LSS or a TWD that they aren't good enough to play tractor pull anywhere but in the brush. I am not really offended, it is just a hot button. ITPA needs to take a look at the reality of what is going on in the current state of tractor pulling if they want the organization to truly maintain and grow. |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
Know matter what you do you will always spend money to tractor pull . Just how much you want to. If there's enough interest to start another class , go for it . But keep the rules simular to other groups so you can maybe pick up day members |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
G705
|
I am curious as to what type of horsepower some of you guys think this class would be with the above rules.
I would disagree that this class is close to LLSS. Our group and ITPA do not want this class to be LLSS. You go unlimited rpm, more cubes, multiple turbos, coolers, alcohol, 24.5 tire or 30.5's,etc.( I realize not every LLSS class in every organization has all those things). then it's not even in the same universe in my opinion. ITPA is wanting an entry level class, 1000+ horsepower is not an entry level class in most people's mind. From reading the responses to my post so far, it sounds to me like there is significant interest in a LLSS class for ITPA. My sincere suggestion is organize. Easier said than done, I know. If you can get 10 guys together, craft a set of rules you can all agree on that makes sense and knock on their door. I think they will listen. |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
A good LLSS tractor is pushing the 1300 and then some. So them rules you should see 800 - 1000 on a these |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Ok, then I'll ask this. If the new class were to come about(I think you have to have 10 paid members or vehicles) what current class will ITPA lose? It's a "hot button" with me also because I have worked my butt off over the last 20 to 25 years getting the Supertiquer to where it is. And so have the rest in the class I pull in.
I could say a lot more but I am not going to. |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Where are the new builds coming from?
|
Not denying that you or other guys in your class have worked hard to get where you are at and the LSS class has the support from its membership but you and your classmates have built up over time to that level. I can relate to the struggle to build to what you have. But all of these classes have built from $900 turbos and $1200 superchargers to the $3500 turbos and $5000 superchargers. If you didn't have the Supertiquer today, what would you build from the ground up? Classes like these are not meant to take hooks away from current classes and competitors. A class like this one is where your next LSS competitor is going to come from as long as they don't get treated like a second class citizen because they didn't feel like they could devote the time and budget to run in a GN class. |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
I guess I started something here that I really didn't want to. That's why I said I really didn't want to offend anyone. But I can say from my experience(and I have had a lot) that the next lss puller will not come from this proposed class. What will happen in this proposed class is someone will want MORE after about 2 or 3 years of pulling in this class, Then everyone will have to "update" to that and spend more.And when it comes down to it, you would have been better off to just start with the classes that are offered to begin with. I by NO MEANS am trying to knock it down. It's just what I have seen over my pulling career with ITPA, ISP and other organizations.
It's been a very somber week for ITPA and it's members as we have lost 3 pullers. Lord willing, we will be at the annual meeting and hope to see you there. With that said, I wish you a very Happy Thanksgiving. |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Dave k
|
Can't speak fo anyone else but we would not be in tractor pulling today if were not for the 9000 farm stock class in its original form. 9000 FS was an easy class to get into and not break the bank to get one running competitive, not so today. |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
9500
|
A f'nmen.... went from a constent 15-17 tractors to 6... 8 on a goid day... that made sense |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Lewis
|
A LLSS tractor would be a lot cheaper to build than a tractor for this proposed class any class that says p 7100 and recast heads will never be a starter class . somebody already has one and is pushing for this class |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
KEN MCKILLIP
|
i agree |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Lewis
|
Ken I sold my last llss tractor with the thoughts of building a light hot farm which is basically the the same rules as this class .When I started pricing pumps injectors the prices was ridiculous for the price of a good diesel fuel system you can go a long way on the engine and fuel system for a alcohol llss .I'm building a alcohol Cummins for a person now with plans of making it to the Ky invitational the ingnition msd 8+ complete fuel system all new everything it takes to hit the switch around 4000.00 The ITPA should strongly consider the llss class it is the future its as cheap or cheaper than therye proposed class and growing But if that works for them go for it sounds like a high dollar farm class to me |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
So if the ITPA would consider the llss class(which is a good class) what would happen to the lss class that is currently pulling with ITPA? Would all the people that pull in it have to "update" to a llss? Ask me about "updating" |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Lewis
|
Its two separate classes ones got nothing to do with the other it just sound like a awful expencive class to run 18,4s.a 7100 pump and after market heads on ,Ditch the head change the tires to 30s add the alcohol and boom you have the llss class and the people that cant afford the cost of a diesel set up can buy a 15 dollar set of spark plugs instead of the 3000.00 dollar set of injectors that's just my thinking but I don't live there and don't really care |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
Now Lewis , I just priced injectors from FVP for 1600 new so don't be exaggerating |
|
Re: I am going to say this
|
Lewis
|
Dave if your going to get serious spend that other 1400 you can buy a new hx60 for 1100 but you wont keep up with the guy who spent 4500 on theres we just parted out a diesel that had a 70000 $ injecter pump a 3000$ set of injectors and a 8000$ ball bearing hx 82 turbo and a 3000$ dollar set of pistons in it and a Illinois counter weighted crank so theres a llss diesel that just got junked with a Columbus head and roller cam so theres your diesel if your going to be serious |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Have followed this topic before..... in the old days minimal safety requirements in a" quote" entry level class. No cage , no side shields, no fire suit or helmets.just for starters. Insurance carriers demand the same for entry level classes as the 10 PS . the true pullers adapt and comply. Talk to the pullers that quit and this will be the most common complaint. look at the proposed rules ..Safety equipment required. Now look at the basic build cost......cage $1000, tube frame $3000 , P7100 pump and injectors $8000, turbo $3500 , water injection $4500. Tires $2500 You just spent $22000+ and have not even been to the machine shop for internal engine work...start keeping track of all the small parts that always seem to be overlooked What did you spend on the starter chassis? I don't think you will build a tractor for less than $35000.
some STARTER CLASS as far as 9500's comments about 15-17 tractors----- when at least 5-7 go home without some kind of check ,it starts to thin the 'herd' |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
9500
|
Not hardly... actually.... it was growing in numbers until cages became mandatory... then a few guys sold and moved up... Then tube frames and coolers came along and now your lucky to get 6 9500pf all year... Contrary to popular beliefs most pullers at that level aren't in it for the prize money. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Pulled there
|
You can take the water out because its not allowed. As far as tube frame, not needed. Roll cage yes because of insurance. P pump price is a lil high. You can can get used ones that are good for half that price you stated. Been there done that |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
You better go back and look at the proposed rules. Water injection is allowed. Tube frame may not be needed but is allowed. Roll cage has nothing to do with insurance. The roll cage is mandatory because it's ITPA's rules. The insurance company does NOT dictate ITPA safety rules. Ask Mike Miller or any other director about it. P pump may be high priced, but that will not affect some one that will pay the price for a new one. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
A new 7100p pump will cost close to 5500-6. So if you buy used at 3000-3500 and have it gone through be for the season around 1500 you saved a little but still spend that much. So pulling is not cheap endeavor |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Pulled there
|
I see water injection missed it. As far as cages when i was running profarm/farmstock was when the change was made. Someone correct me if im wrong but pretty sure the statement made was because of insurance coverage because the rops was unsafe for what we were running. Im not talking about bigger classes they were mandatory already but pro farms were not at that time |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Supertiquer, correct me if I am wrong but the cage issue was because the RPM limit was over factory specs thus making the class a enhanced performance class that dictated a cage per insurance requirements |
|
Pulled there and Pulling in todays world
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Honestly on the cage issue yes I believe that is right as far as the 9500 goes. On the 11,000 I really never heard how that is because the cage is only good for 10,000 lbs.. Now there may have been something with SFI on that, that I never heard about. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 09/24/2008 Posts: 176 |
We run this class in Wny . 6500 lbs 2.6 turbo ,410 cubes, no aftermarket heads , 18x38 any cut 3200 rpm water inj class is very competitive and it's nowhere near llss , not even close we have that class too . 500-700 hp is the range and it's no where near cost of llss! Awesome class lots of color , all colors can win we even allow v8s in too , it works . Do your self a favor and keep the aftermarket heads out! |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 06/20/2017 Posts: 162 |
for what its worth i'm from TN so i have no dog in this race how ever my home town is either hot farm or mph classes or you can get with ntpa and start at super farm or which ever class you choose. I think this would make a decent starter class because around here i started on farm stock and the next step is either go slow or go to hot farm which is running 3000 rpm and 466cube intercooler water injection and to my knowledge i don't know of anyone ask what size turbo these guys are running which most top guys run a 3.2x3.6 or something real close with a p pump of course point being to run that you can spend 50k quick i had wished there was a in between class that could help people get started like this one because i would say this is cheaper class |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
A
|
This new class is just the same as the IPA outlaw class. Except you can run water in itpa where in ipa no water allowed. The ipa outlaw class has had anywhere from 8-18 tractors at every pull |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
It is a PROPOSED new class in ITPA. Not a NEW class yet. And your post tells me a lot. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
A
|
If they let all the non diesel tractors pull too from the ipa class this one class would have more in one class then itpa has in a whole show at alot of pulls. Be nice if more organizations would adopt each others same rules and allow pullers to have more choices of where they could pull at would put on much better shows when a pull will lst more then 45 mins to a hour when classes obly have 2, 3 4 slmetimes maybe 6 tractors show up |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Then I would say that you better do something to get rid of the diesel only in the proposed class rules. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
There are rules for a class like this, it's called LLSS. So why not consider these rules so you just don't have a diesel class . You might be surprised different tractors show |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
C Downs
|
I think a Light Limited Super Stock class would hurt ITPA's Light Super Stock class. First, if you can get the builds in the area and it not suffer the same fate as Super Farm where all but 3 Super Farms came from another state. You would be marketing a class that for all intents and purposes look like LSS to the average fan. Couple that with the purse difference, there would more than likely be a gravitation to LLSS to be booked by promoters. The current LSS class in ITPA has a very good core group of tractors that is averaging 7 tractors per show and they had 19 hooks in the 2017 season. They have earned their place with a good show and the lower dollar class that "looks like" them would be an issue. If there were an interest in LLSS in the geographic area, then ITPA would have already heard from 10 guys to try and bring it to fruition.
As far as the proposed class being close to LLSS, I can speak from genuine experience it is far from it. The IPA Outlaw class that has been referred to in previous posts was conceptualized by myself and Andy Buhr and there is not the wheel/ground speed, nor is there the "feel" that comes with an unlimited RPM class. Essentially, it worked exactly as we thought as far as promoting new builds and bringing in new competitors that didn't want to run an antique tractor and who couldn't afford a heavy Pro Farm. The class now stands with an average of 10-12 tractors per show. And no one dropped out of any other classes. They were new builds. The difference from Outlaw to this proposed class is a 2.330 turbo w/map groove to a 2.6 smooth bore and Outlaw does not allow water and the new class would. The only changes to the class in IPA was to help with parity between turbo and N/A in that class. The average turbo horsepower in the class is 650 ish. There are guys making more and some making less but that is the range. The turbo size and water is going to make some additional HP but we are talking about 3000rpm with a 2.6 charger. This is not a 3.0, unlimited RPM with a cooler. The recast cylinder head has to be of outer stock dimensions. If this class gets the support at the meeting to become an ITPA class and the board keeps the limits where they are, this class will become a very good supporting class. Since I am feeling a little clairvoyant, if this class comes to fruition and the rules are left in their current form. The 10 base competitors that come in will grow to 15. The class won't "replace" the LSS or other "high end" classes but should create some relief for some of the overloaded classes like the 85 limited pros. Also, new membership should bring in the possibility of ITPA getting back into venues that they have lost over time. The home fair of a new member may bring ITPA back now that a "hometown" puller could bring a vehicle. And of course other ITPA classes could come with it. Only speculation at this point. No one will know for another 10 days or so anyway. And if it does come to time, the overall management of the class and organization is what makes it a success or disaster to the group. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
The biggest thing is not put in rules that will hurt your class . Back when BSTP started the LLSS class a few guys wanted to decube a 400 series IH and it was voted down . So down the road I think it hurt the class , now we have that rule |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
C Downs
|
I am not going to sound very professional with this part of the conversation but allowing de-cubing would be the down fall of this class. Under the proposed limits and rules every color (and I mean every color) has a platform to build from. Which by the way is proven by the stats in the Outlaw class. Moline, IH, Massey, AC and Oliver all compete in the class. If the 400 series IH was allowed, all of a sudden weight will be an issue and "we need more weight to be safe" and then chassis bigger than what the class is intended for would be in the class. You also fight a cubic inch nightmare. The smaller cube platforms that all colors have of course allow for more than 380 but not much more. You allow the 400 series (or other colors) to de-cube, you will always have the doubt that you aren't pulling against a 540 or 600 in a 380 limit class. Then you have potential and current competitors losing interest and you have another all 66 series international class.
The 410 limit in LLSS may bring about the need for the de-cubing and apparently works in that class setting but you put it in place in a class like this and it is dead before it starts, it is just no one knows it. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
All I stated is don't make a rule that hurts a class . Maybe there are guys that would like the different fuel opportunity. And maybe that would get there 10 pullers to start it Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/28/2017 06:02AM by David Runkle(earls dream). |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
C Downs
|
Copy that. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
I don't have a dog in the fight, but a stock IH head will flow more than a ported AC head of same cubic inch. So I would be for de cubing.. MACK |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Confused
|
It seems to me that if there are already ipa tractors very similar in the same state withe the same rules. If you changed the turbo to 2.3 slotted then bam you have your 10 members and the class doesn't die before it ever even gets started |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Oh
|
Hmmm make to much sense to have same rules wish Itpa and Ipa could have classes with same rules maybe a slight easy chance between the two like maybe one orginazation run class different weight but have the core rules same. That way competiors could support both organizations. However doudt that would happen. Some want water and ipa doesnt allow water was a few running water. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
From what I understand, this class was added to ITPA this weekend.That's fine and great. But yet no one has started a new post on it. I'm thinking that maybe all that wanted this class should start a new post thanking ITPA for their efforts. But that is just what I think. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
G705
|
I can tell you that some members of the board were personally thanked face to face with a handshake on Saturday by those of us in the class who were in attendance.
We are excited, believe the ITPA is excited as well. There are some other folks out there who are intending some builds that we were unaware of. You can hold me to this, I may be wrong (have been before, will be again) but by year 2 I think you will see 12-15 tractors in this class with no problem. Will have lots of color. I am not sure how soon but final rules will be posted on ITPA website. Official name is 6850 pro farm. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Good deal, I am sure they appreciated that. Your class sounds interesting, but what ever you do, don't let it get out of hand. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Out of hand
|
Kinda out of hand already when u only have 9 tractors and everyone pools the money together to pay for a 16 yr old on a fictional tractor. I'm sure that makes the board happy. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Are you a member of ITPA? |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
E Z
|
Jezus Cowman don't be so butt hurt cuz you can't dick up this particular sandbox. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Easy e
|
Since cowman can't figure out how to post anything I would have to say go dig deeper in ur sandbox. |
|
Re: proposed new itpa class
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
I had a good talk with an ITPA director last night on the phone. After talking to him and having him explain some things to me, I can see the point of this class.
As current members, we all need to look at this with open minds. |
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,564, Posts: 229,578, Members: 3,319.
This forum: Topics: 37,055, Posts: 225,839.
Global: Topics: 38,564, Posts: 229,578, Members: 3,319.
This forum: Topics: 37,055, Posts: 225,839.
Our newest member BadHabit2
