Clones of CM4228 That Fold / Bifurcate - Page 5 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
 

Go Back   Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums > Canadian Internet, Phone, TV and Wireless Service Providers > Over-The-Air (OTA) Digital Television > Antenna Research & Development

Digital Home Helpful Information

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 2013-06-06, 12:50 AM   #61
Pete Higgins
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: California, 58 miles @112 degrees from Mt. Wilson
Posts: 118
Default

roger1818 & all,

As promised by Solid Signal, my $60.04 delivered HDB8X 8-Bay Bow Tie Antenna arrived this afternoon. It was double boxed in a heavy duty brown corrugated cardboard outer box and a thiner white corrugated cardboard inner box. The two 4-Bay panels were stored back-to-back in the white box with the cross beams loosely assembled and tie wrapped to them. There was also an assembly & installation manual and one rubber boot in a plastic bag.

The assembly & installation manual “What's Included” section lists:
(2) Mast Clamp Braces
(2) Regular Braces
(2) Sections of Antenna
(3) Weather Boots
(I only received one boot but that is all that is needed. Each length of 4-bay panel BALUM to combiner coax came (loosely) attached to their respective panel's BALUM and had a boot installed on each end.)

If you know how the antenna goes together assembly is straight forward, tool-less and easy. As with a lot of assembly manuals, however, the three listed steps (A, B & C) were not intuitively obvious. Fortunately, the manual listed a link to an assembly video: http://www.xtremesignal.com/hdb8x.html that can also be found on YouTube @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=BWfW1ncmOr4 (Thank you Mike!). I would strongly suggest that anybody assembling this antenna for the first time watch the video. FYI, to make mine look like the one in the manual & video I had to unscrew the combiner, rotate it 180 deg. and reattach it. Also, to have all the wing nuts on the back side of the antenna I had to reverse a number of the lower brace bolts. Fortunately, both sides of the metal mounting brackets (square tube clamps) have square cutouts to keep the plated carriage bolts from turning.

I am impressed with the way this antenna is designed. First off, the 16 individual 8” elements appear to be stamped from 1.66 mm (~0.065”) sheet aluminum. The matching harness inter-connecting the 16 elements appear to be formed from a relatively heavy 3.88 mm (~.153”) aluminum wire. Each element is held in place and in contact with the matching harness by a Phillips head screw into the plastic stand-off. This means that after a few years service when oxidation forms, unlike my Channel Master 4228 that has the wire elements riveted to plastic brackets, I should be able to remove the screws and clean all the contact areas. The element to harness contact area is a generous 11.12 mm (0.437”) wide. The BALUM is also bolted to the harness making all pressure contact areas accessible for cleaning. The 32 round through boom reflector tubes are 8.18 mm (0.322”) thick X ~19 ½ long. They are capped at the outer ends by a curved plastic extrusion that may mask progressively longer (~1”) rods at the center of each 2-Bay panel. The square supporting tubes measure 18.38 mm (0.723”). There is a lot of hardware provided to build this antenna that appears to result in a relatively robust design.

When fully assembled, the overall antenna is 32 1/2” tall X 47 7/8” wide X ~5 1/4” deep.

Hopefully, this weekend I'll have time to get it mounted and on the air.
Pete Higgins is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 2013-06-06, 01:58 AM   #62
Pete Higgins
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: California, 58 miles @112 degrees from Mt. Wilson
Posts: 118
Default

OK, I got the HDB8X together & couldn’t resist trying it.

By holding it up @ ~4’ AGL in my downstairs dining room, hooked to my computer’s Hauppauge HVR-1800 tuner I am able to watch two UHF channels from San Diego, channel 19 (69.1 KSWB) and channel 40 (39.1 NBC). These channels are both 88 miles @ ~166 deg. which means the signal is coming through the whole house. Pointed it towards LA (51 miles away) and got channel 36 (4.1 KNBC) with a SNR of 22.1, channel 31 (5.1 KTLA CW) with a SNR of 15.6 and the few others that I tried until my arm got tired. Maybe tonight’s just a fluke, but truthfully from down here, I didn’t expect to get anything other than channel 26 (24.1 KVCR) the PBS station 3.5 miles away.
Pete Higgins is online now  
Old 2013-06-07, 11:18 AM   #63
Pete Higgins
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: California, 58 miles @112 degrees from Mt. Wilson
Posts: 118
Default HDB8X vs CM-4228

I do not claim to “scientifically” test or even fairly compare multiple antennas. I can, however, report my real world results, recognizing the constraints I’m faced with. Make what you will of the information. I can confirm that lugging antennas and climbing ladders was a lot easier 50 years ago. It must be something in the water?

Since I can’t raise or lower my pushup mast by myself, I fixed mounted the new Solid Signal HDB8X on it below the rotor. The bottom of the HDB8X is @ 21’ 7” AGL, 5’ 9” below the bottom of the 40 year old Channel Master CM-4228 (not a new “HD” model). For the last several weeks, the CM-4228 has been connected through a new white 17’ RG-6 cable to the base of the pushup mast, an F-81 F-F barrel, 50’ of new white Magnavox M61210 RG-6 to a coax switch in the garage. My Winegard YA 1713 was similarly connected through a new black 17’ RG-6 cable, an F-81 F-F barrel to a 32 year old piece of RG-6 that also ran to the coax switch in the garage. During amplifier testing I verified there was no SNR variance @ UHF frequencies between using the new white vs using the old black garage coax runs.

I disconnected the black garage RG-6 cable from my YA 1713 and used that piece for testing the new HDB8X. The garage coax switch was used to switch between the CM-4228 & the HDB8X. The single output of the garage coax switch is connected to a new ~75’ thru-wall RG-6, run to my office computer and Hauppauge HVR-1800 tuner card used for this comparison. In other words, everything from the coax switch in the garage to the point of measurement was common for both antennas.

Using the rotor, I “bump” aligned the CM-4228 for maximum SNR on LA channel 36 (4.1 KNBC) and then, by eyeball, “fix” aligned the HDB8X to match. I purposely did not try to introduce the variance of two separate amplifiers although looking at my TV Fool report amplification is certainly called for: http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...1dda169109ca5c

The HVR-1800 was tuned to a channel & the SNR recorded, I then ran to the garage to throw the switch, returnd and record the new reading, tuned to the next channel, record it and repeated the process. Measurements were alternated between antennas so that each antennas value was recorded 20~30 seconds apart.

I also included measurements from my <1 year old Antennas Direct 91XG/Antennacraft Y10-7-13. These antennas are tower mounted @ ~40’ AGL and have individual +15 dB PCT MA2-M drop amplifiers connected via either an F-71 M-M barrel for the 91XG or a 300 ohm to 75 ohm BALUM and short piece of RG-6 for the Y10-7-13. The output of each amplifier connects to a UVSJ feeding ~125’ of new RG-6 that connects in my garage to a PCT MA2-4P +8dB/output per leg distribution amplifier one leg of which feeds a separate new run of RG-6 into my office. A different HVR-1800 tuner card & computer were used to take these readings. This is clearly an apple to oranges comparison, but is in-part justified by the fact that when I swapped the 91XG & CM-4228 last summer there wasn’t a significant difference in amplified performance. If nothing else it should be predictive of what I might achieve by adding a +23 dB amplification chain to the HDB8X and mounting it on the tower.



If it were still made, I would certainly recommend the Channel Master CM-4228 over the HDB8X if for no other reason than its High VHF capabilities. Within its design frequency range the unamplified HDB8X average UHF SNR of 13.975 compares favorably to the 13.7429 of the unamplified CM-4228. .23 difference is well within my margin of reading error since the tenths digit for both antennas was constantly changing. Had I been able to align the HDB8X with a rotor I may have been able to improve its SNR, especially for the San Diego stations. Last summer when I swapped out my brand new tower mounted 91XG with the CM-4228 I was really surprised when it matched the 91XG SNR’s within 1-2 dB on all channels. The 91XG was better on slightly over half of the channels but the CM-4228 definitely held its own. For that test I replaced the 91XG’s F-71 M-M barrel to PCT MA2-M connector with an ~18” piece of coax to the CM-4228’s 75/300 ohm BALUM keeping the amplifier, UVSJ and coax paths to the measurement computer fundamentally the same for both antennas. Extrapolating those results to today’s tests leads me to conclude that at my location there isn’t a significant UHF performance difference between the three antennas.
Pete Higgins is online now  
Old 2013-06-08, 02:04 AM   #64
Pete Higgins
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: California, 58 miles @112 degrees from Mt. Wilson
Posts: 118
Default Is the HDB8X really multi-directional?

A compelling advertised feature of the HDB8X is its ability to align the 4-Bay panels to receive broadcasts originating from different directions. Since I predominately watch UHF stations coming from San Diego @ ~169 deg. (True) and Los Angeles @~292 deg. (292 – 169 = 123 deg.) I thought I would see how well it performed when configured with the panels orientated at a 123 deg. angle.

Similar to what I did yesterday, using the rotor, I “bump” aligned the CM-4228 for maximum SNR on San Diego channel 30 (15.1 KPBS) and then, by eyeball, “fix” aligned the non-movable HDB8X panel to match. I then “bump” aligned the CM-4228 for maximum SNR on LA channel 36 (4.1 KNBC) and then, by eyeball, “fix” aligned the movable HDB8X panel to match.
FYI, I had to tighten the wing nuts on the mast clamps until they were vertical to align the movable panel. To go more than ~130 deg. you’ll probably have to shorten the mast clamp bolts on the moveable panel side.

While I got my normal 3 San Diego UHF stations, I thought I had a bad panel pointing towards LA. Other than my local channel 26 (24.1 PBS TVFool @ -15.6) I couldn’t receive any LA stations. After several trips to the roof to check connections & alignment I decided to disconnect the LA panel from the combiner and use it like a standalone 4-Bay. I connected the combiner end of the HDB8X harness through an F-81 F-F barrel to the black coax used for testing yesterday. Configured standalone, I got channel 38 (30.1 ION) with an SNR in the 15.x range. Usually anything below 16.x isn’t watchable for very long. Clearly to be useable I was going to have to add an amplifier.

I connected the combiner end of the HDB8X harness through an F-81 F-F barrel to a 15’ section of RG-6 coax. I connected this new length of coax through a Channel Plus NF-471 55dB channel 24-29 notch filter to my Winegard AP-2870 amplifier’s UHF input. Configured this way I got 13 of the 19 channels I had yesterday. As expected, I lost the San Diego channels and all but one (PBS) of those in the NF-471 notch.

Pleased with the amplified single panel results, I reconnected the HDB8X harness to its combiner input and connected the 15’ section of RG-6 coax to the combiner output.



Combining the two antennas resulted in the total loss of 9 LA stations and dramatically reduced the others. Based on today’s testing results, for my location, the HDB8X is a competitive 8-Bay Bow Tie when used in its “flat panel” configuration but is nearly useless for leveraging its advertised multi-direction feature.

I suppose one advantage it still has over a conventional 8-Bay like my CM-4228 would be the ability to use it as 2 separate 4-Bays and run separate cables to a coaxial switch?

I also ran a series of tests substituting a PCT MA2-M +15 dB cable drop amp for the Winegard AP-2870. The Channel Plus NF-471 notch filter was not used with the MA2-M.
Pete Higgins is online now  
Old 2013-06-10, 01:44 PM   #65
roger1818
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ottawa (Stittsville), ON, OTA (DB4e & VHF-HI folded dipole, AP-2870 pre-amp in Attic), MythTV HTPC
Posts: 5,983
Default

Pete Higgins, I am not surprised that aiming it in different directions gives worse results. 4-bay antennas are typically a bad choice for ganging as they have wide beam widths and thus it is highly likely they will interfere with each other. Ganging is better done with more directional antennas.
__________________
Link to my TVFool results is in my profile Homepage URL. I suggest others do the same.
roger1818 is offline  
Old 2013-06-11, 02:46 PM   #66
Pete Higgins
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: California, 58 miles @112 degrees from Mt. Wilson
Posts: 118
Default More HDB8X Info.

roger1818 & all,

Experimenting with OTA is strictly a hobby, although, since I grew up there, it is really neat to be able to watch the San Diego news, something that even cable doesn’t offer. Even a $60 antenna is cheaper than a dinner out or a trip to Disney Land, and for me a whole lot more entertaining. Reading these forums for the last few months has kept me thoroughly intrigued. I’ve learned a lot and really appreciate all the feedback from so many of the regular posters. I don’t know how anybody can keep track of all the information I’ve been referred to. I turn 70 next month so I’m not sure how many more years I’ll be able to climb towers or even get up on the roof, but I’ve got to believe if I keep doing it I’ll last a little longer. I just hope some of my feedback proves useful to others.

When I assembled the HDB8X antenna, I noticed that the coax was unusually thin and very flexible with rubber boots and molded connectors installed @ each end.

Sunday, I decided to document the coax harness and test it and the supplied combiner (by substitution). Fortunately, it was marked as 3C-2V, which made looking up its specs. relatively easy. It is just another form of 75 ohm coax.



I was surprised to find a ¼” difference in length when measured from connector screw-on edge to screw-on edge.

First, I substituted two length matched 36” pieces of RG-6 between each of the HDB8X’s BALUM's and the combiner. Worst case loss for 34” of 3C-2V@ 700 MHz = ~.268 dB and should be insignificant compared to RG-6 @ .217 dB. Needless to say, this test didn’t yield any noticeable difference. Next, I left the RG-6 connected to the BALUM’s and substituted an ordinary 1 GHz 2-way splitter for the combiner. Again, no noticeable difference in SNR.

Here is a picture showing the installation and comparing antenna sizes.



tripelo over on the TVFool forum pointed out;

Quote:
Case 3. If both antennas have their separate matching preamplifiers prior to combining, then there is isolation between input ports, so:

* No loss thru re-radiation,
* No S/N loss through combiner,

This is because both signal and noise have been raised above noise floor by preamplifier, so combiner loss in effect just lowers gain of both signal and noise. Not affecting S/N ratio.
Based on that, I want to try mounting an amp to the LA oriented panel and combine its output with the un-amplified signal from the San Diego panel. I only have one unused PCT MA2-M + 15 dB amp left or I would use one on each panel. I do have a physically much bigger spare + 10 dB drop amp so if the first try doesn’t work I can add it also.

Even though I have 4 rotors, it would be a lot more convenient to surf the UHF channels without having to wait for the antenna to reposition.
Pete Higgins is online now  
Old 2013-06-12, 04:15 PM   #67
ppauper
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
Pete Higgins, I am not surprised that aiming it in different directions gives worse results. 4-bay antennas are typically a bad choice for ganging as they have wide beam widths and thus it is highly likely they will interfere with each other. Ganging is better done with more directional antennas.
Pete Higgins, heed this well: if you want to use the panels pointed in differing directions, run coax from both to an A-B switch or get a very expensive combiner (which takes specific channels from each panel) from somewhere like TinLee
Folks have said for the DB8e that you can lose up to 6dB by using a regular combiner with the panels pointed in differing direction
ppauper is offline  
Old 2013-06-12, 04:19 PM   #68
ppauper
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Higgins View Post
BALUM
balun
ppauper is offline  
Old 2013-06-13, 10:09 AM   #69
roger1818
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ottawa (Stittsville), ON, OTA (DB4e & VHF-HI folded dipole, AP-2870 pre-amp in Attic), MythTV HTPC
Posts: 5,983
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ppauper View Post
run coax from both to an A-B switch or get a very expensive combiner (which takes specific channels from each panel) from somewhere like TinLee
Or run the coax lines to separate tuners. This works really well with a HTPC as it can typically be configured to view/record different channels from different tuners. You can even make the switching of tuners invisible to the user when watching live TV, so all you have to do is select a channel and it will use the best tuner available. Channels that can be received by both antennas can have priorities set up so that it will use a tuner connected to the preferred antenna if it is available, otherwise it will use the other one.
__________________
Link to my TVFool results is in my profile Homepage URL. I suggest others do the same.
roger1818 is offline  
Old 2013-06-17, 08:38 AM   #70
ppauper
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 245
Default

angel electronics is selling this thing as well

which looks the same as the solid signal


angel electronics claim an antenna gain of 20-36dB and want $50
ppauper is offline  
Old 2013-06-19, 01:58 AM   #71
Pete Higgins
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: California, 58 miles @112 degrees from Mt. Wilson
Posts: 118
Default

ppauper,

I know how to spell BALUN. I’ve been misspelling it since I was a kid. If I don’t consciously remind myself that it stands for BALanced to UNbalanced, I’ll do it every time.

ppauper & All,

I was able to try tripelo’s suggestion to isolate the panels through RF amplifiers. I have the HDB8X fix mounted on a push-up mast ~ 5’ below the rotor that turns my CM-4228 & YA 1713.

Fortunately, I had two runs of coax going to the push-up mast. I setup 2 power inserters in the garage and combined their output signals through a 1 GHz splitter. At the mast I hooked a Winegard HDP-269 to the San Diego facing panel using the supplied HDB8X 34” 3C-2V coax and hooked a Winegard AP-2870 to the LA facing panel using that panels coax. I connected the Winegard YA-1713 through an Antennas Direct -20 dB FM trap to the AP-2870 VHF input. Things got a little better but I was still missing LA channels and sometimes would have to retune several times to get lock on an LA channel. I had the same problems when I tried to use the AP-2870 with my 91XG. I have an FM radio station @ -13.6 dBm and channel 26 (24.1-4 @ -15.6 dBm), a 475 kW PBS station on a hill top 3.5 miles from my house in line with all the LA stations (52 miles away).

Next, I installed a Channel Plus NF-471 55dB channel 24-29 notch filter on the UHF input to the AP-2870. For the first time ever this completely eliminated RF channel 26 (24.1 KVCR @ -15.6 dBm). Since the filter was only on the LA panel, this suggests there is significant rejection from the San Diego facing panel. My SNR meter pegs out @ 30 dB and two of the three San Diego UHF stations pegged the meter. The third showed 29.5 dB. That was a dramatic improvement. LA reception also appeared to improve but I’m still missing channels.

A poster on another forum opened his combiner and posted a picture of its internal construction. That got me thinking that mine might pass power through both ports. When I measured it, I showed open from the case (ground) to all of the center conductors and continuity between all three center conductors. Not knowing this, I ran separate (different length) powered coax’s to each amplifier and combined their outputs in the garage. I rewired taking advantage of the power passing this style combiner affords. Combining the amplifier outputs through the HDB8X combiner right at the antenna and eliminating the splitter in the garage improved the SNR’s for the LA stations. My combiner is labeled “FREQUENCY MIXER, 470-862 MHz, INSERTION LOSS less than or equal to 4.8 dB”. While adding the amplifiers ahead of the combiner raises (~doubles) the noise floor, they more than compensate for the combiner loss. I am still suffering the ~3 dB signal reduction of a 4-Bay vs. an 8-Bay and that’s hurting already marginal stations, but while channel surfing, it sure is nice not to have to wait on my rotor while the antenna turns.
Pete Higgins is online now  
Old 2013-06-19, 02:29 AM   #72
holl_ands
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,969
Default

Are you sure it's labeled "FREQUENCY MIXER"??? What is the manufacturer and part number???

If it is labeled "FREQUENCY MIXER" then I would suspect that it is exactly what it says....a non-linear MIXER, which contains some diodes and other components....and would be a very poor RF Splitter/Combiner....or perhaps it's mislabeled due to something being Lost In Translation:
http://www.microwaves101.com/encyclo...lebalanced.cfm
http://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedia/mixers.cfm
holl_ands is online now  
Old 2013-06-19, 03:08 PM   #73
Pete Higgins
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: California, 58 miles @112 degrees from Mt. Wilson
Posts: 118
Default HDB8X multi-directional w/dual amps. & power pass combiner

holl_ands,

Thanks for the “microwaves101” tutorials. I’ve actually had the pleasure (punishment?) of aligning TRF radios mentioned in the second article that were still in use in the late 50’s. Getting all three stages to track across the AM band was hard enough but when you throw in the SW bands it could turn into an all-day exercise. I heard some of my first LW/SW broadcasts on those old console model TRF’s.

A poster on another forum (TV Fool) was reporting significantly poorer results comparing his HDB8X to a CM-4228 than what I observed. When he substituted a different combiner, he reported several dB’s improvement in signal strength. He removed his combiners cover and posted this picture:



When I saw how his combiner was configured, I pulled mine off the antenna and checked it for continuity. My unit was labeled “FREQUENCY MIXER, 470-862 MHz, INSERTION LOSS less than or equal to 4.8 dB” with the less than or equal symbol in front of the 4.8 dB. That was the only writing on my unit so I don’t have a part number. He subsequently posted pictures of his antenna and it turns out it is a different movable panel 8- Bay design than the one I have.

On my 10 ohm scale (zeroed) I measured 0 ohms between all three center conductors. Both my diode check & high ohms scales measured open from center conductor to the threaded outer metal portion of the connectors (using both polarities) so even though the antennas are different designs, I tend to believe the combiners must be configured similarly. In any case, mine allowed me to insert and power both amplifiers ahead of the combiner.

Interestingly, although it’s labeled 470-862 MHz the high VHF output from the AP-2870 seems to get through it just fine. Of course the 17 dB of AP-2870 VHF gain is probably to blame.

Because of the strong local stations 3.41 miles away I haven’t been able to use the AP-2870 on my tower array without overload. I have always thought the problem was the UHF TV station but adding the 20 dB FM trap to the VHF input and the 55 dB NF-471 notch filter to the UHF input seems to prevent overload. (Instead of connecting the male end of the NF-471 to the antenna, I have it connected to the AP-2870 UHF input, reversing the direction of signal flow. Unlike the FM trap, the NF-471 is not marked for signal flow direction but that could explain why all of a sudden it appears so much more effective?) The LA panel through the AP-2870 and pointed directly at the RF channel 26 tower (my local PBS station@ -15.6 dBm) doesn’t show any response at all. What’s even more surprising is the San Diego panel/HDP-269 (no filters) pushes channel 30 (15.1 KPBS) from San Diego, but doesn’t bleed anything from my local channel 26.

I need to try and get up on the roof later today and take the HDB8X antenna down. I need ~123 degrees between San Diego & LA and even after shortening the mast mounting bolts on one side; I’m not getting quite that much rotation. Fortunately, the 4-Bays have a pretty wide beam pattern.

Again, thanks for all your informative inputs. I really appreciate them.
Pete Higgins is online now  
Old 2013-06-19, 07:31 PM   #74
holl_ands
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,969
Default

RF Splitter/Combiners can be built is several different ways....but the photo above appears to be a "Magic-T" type Hybrid using a Ferrite Transformer...but appears to be MISSING the mis-match dissipation resistor, so port-port isolation probably suffers:
http://michaelgellis.tripod.com/magict.html
http://rfti.com/wp-content/uploads/2...icTutorial.pdf
http://www.ieee.li/pdf/essay/directional_couplers.pdf

Nearly ALL standard Cable type RF Splitters I've measured have NO DC conductivity between ports, incl. output to output due to a DC blocking capacitor.

ALL Satellite RF Splitters add an inductor from the input to one of the output ports to add a DC PASS capability....or two inductors for DC PASS to BOTH ports....which delivers DC Power from the Sat Receiver to the Sat Dish's LNB....some SAT Receivers used two different voltage levels to select different receive polarization signals.
holl_ands is online now  
Old 2013-06-19, 10:23 PM   #75
rabbit73
DHC Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 190
Default

Pete:

Good job on testing the HDB8X.
Quote:
A compelling advertised feature of the HDB8X is its ability to align the 4-Bay panels to receive broadcasts originating from different directions.
You certainly have demonstrated that their claims are greatly exaggerated!

I have read that combining two UHF antennas aimed in different directions will work upon rare occasions, but not usually.
__________________
If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
rabbit73 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:26 PM.

OTA Forum Sponsor


Search Digital Home

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.