ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > Layin' down tracks > GPS 101 - Which GPS For Me
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 7 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old 02-10-2013, 07:35 AM   #16
Albie
Kool Aid poisoner
 
Albie's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Upstate SC
Oddometer: 8,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmbeedee View Post

So Garmin confuses the issue by giving it different terminology even in the gps units...
This is a direct result of farming out cheap, foreign, contract software development. This is why you see the SAME reoccurring errors end up in new gen units in the same product line. This is why you see very little willingness on Garmin's part to change something as simple as increasing the ridiculously limited 50 via point in the high end handhelds like the Montana.
__________________
Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun.

Another day, another foot injury!
Albie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 08:21 AM   #17
Emmbeedee OP
Procrastinators
 
Emmbeedee's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: Near Ottawa, ON, Canada
Oddometer: 8,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albie View Post
This is a direct result of farming out cheap, foreign, contract software development.
is this like the guy who was winning awards at his job for his programming skills, all the while farming his work out to programmers in China for a fraction of his salary?

http://monevator.com/could-you-outso...-job-to-china/
__________________
Want to know more about the Garmin Montana? See the Wisdom and FAQ Thread.
Want to know more about the Garmin VIRB? See here.
"The motorcycle, being poorly designed for both flight and marine operation, sustained significant external and internal damage," police noted.
Emmbeedee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 08:43 AM   #18
Albie
Kool Aid poisoner
 
Albie's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Upstate SC
Oddometer: 8,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmbeedee View Post
is this like the guy who was winning awards at his job for his programming skills, all the while farming his work out to programmers in China for a fraction of his salary?

http://monevator.com/could-you-outso...-job-to-china/
Good ole American ingenuity.
__________________
Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun.

Another day, another foot injury!
Albie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 01:20 PM   #19
snooker
AttitudeIsEverything
 
snooker's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Loveland, Colorado
Oddometer: 1,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albie View Post
OK, just did a quicky route and put shaping points at both intersections and non intersections, the Montana shows pins at every point.
Plus DRTBYK suggests that he has had the Montana lock up during autorouting sometimes when he put them AT the intersection, so he recommends just AFTER the intersection. This is what I did on my example above.

So I think this is what some people mean when they say "the Montana does not support Shaping points". A pretty general statement IMHO that I was trying to understand but I think this is part of it (again though it does support the "won't alert" feature and does not announce them, so some things are supported).
__________________
Baja 2012 Ride Report ~~~ My 07 BMW G650 XCountry Thread | 03 Honda Shadow ACE 750 | 99 Honda XR400 ~~~

FindMeSpot ~~~ Spotwalla Baja Trip ~~~ Neduro Did Dakar!
snooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 01:33 PM   #20
snooker
AttitudeIsEverything
 
snooker's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Loveland, Colorado
Oddometer: 1,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by snooker View Post
For using the Montana routing activity in any Non-Direct mode, the question here is which route activity setting is best to have used in BaseCamp?

I've read that many people recommend using "Direct" in BaseCamp before moving a route to the Montana where a Non-Direct mode is used. This would have the Montana do the auto-routing. In this case it is also common to have the Track file generated from BaseCamp on the Montana as well. You can always trust the Track file as it never autoroutes.

What do you think?

With the Montana in Non-Direct mode and the BaseCamp route also in a Non-Direct mode, will the Montana always do its own auto-routing or is there a way to force it to just take the route it was given and not recalculate it?
I'd still really like to understand the answer to this last question. It seems to me I read that a big benefit of the Montana is that it would not change (re-calculate) your routes from BaseCamp. I assume this means that you make a route in BaseCamp in a NON-Direct mode so it is routes just like you wanted it, then when you put it onto the Montana it does not re-calculate a route at all, but somehow just uses the old one? Because we KNOW if you use a BaseCamp Direct route then the Montana would have to re-calculate the route. (All of this topic assumes the Montana is in a Non-Direct activity profile).

I would imagine though that this is NOT true, and that instead the Montana ALWAYS calculates a route in its own firmware/software, and the result is based on: 1) the data in the autoroutable mapset enabled on the Montana, 2) all the various types of Via Points (i.e. input requests) provided in the route requested, and 3) the Activity Profile selected, including the Setup->Routing settings on the Montana for: Calculation Method and Avoidance Setup (which has a lot of choices in it).

So I would imagine it is possible that if all the above 3 settings are identical between BaseCamp and the Montana that you *could* get the same route on the Montana. But not so fast! Another variable is the Montana Firmware (and version) and how its autorouting algorithm compares with the one in BaseCamp.

Correct me if I'm wrong, and what is the Realities of this situation? I know a lot has been posted on this and I'd love to capture that in this thread for "posterity"...
__________________
Baja 2012 Ride Report ~~~ My 07 BMW G650 XCountry Thread | 03 Honda Shadow ACE 750 | 99 Honda XR400 ~~~

FindMeSpot ~~~ Spotwalla Baja Trip ~~~ Neduro Did Dakar!
snooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 03:10 PM   #21
Rocky TFS
Studly Adventurer
 
Rocky TFS's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Location: Hailey, Idaho
Oddometer: 518
More on Shaping points

Quote:
=Albie;20690543]The whole shaping point thing was created because of ZUMO owners. As far as I know, none of the other units outside of the ZUMO hide the shaping points.


To stir the pot even MORE, I just came across this on the basecamp forum:

Sample route with working (not displayed and without alerting) shaping points
Originally Posted by FALAGAR
I don't think the Montana supports this. I probably won't be in the next firmware release. Please contact product support and request that feature. The more people ask, the higher the chances it might get implemented."






Hello Falagar,

thank you for this information.

I am using the Montana 650 with Firmware 4.70. At first I thought the Montana would not be able to handle Shaping points. Now I have created one route with CN Europe NT 2013.3 and it works fine with the shaping points.

This route first is showing up 8 via points (10 points in total) and a direct route then it obviously recalculates the route and eliminates 5 of the 8 via points. These 5 points are marked as shaping points in the gpx-file but they are placed onto cross-ways. The lasting 3 via points (also marked as shaping points into the gpx-file) are not placed onto cross-ways but directly on roads. Therefore they are threated like via points. Please be advised that all points in this route are set to alarm in basecamp.

I was not able to repeat such a route but I am sure the attached sample route that is working on a Montana 650 will help the R&D-Department to reproduce this routing behaviour.

Please find attached the route into the gpx-file for testing.

Regards and thanks

Canario


Vockenhausen Idstein (Alarm).gpx

Haven't tried it yet, not sure something didn't get lost in translation....
Rocky TFS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 03:15 PM   #22
Rocky TFS
Studly Adventurer
 
Rocky TFS's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Location: Hailey, Idaho
Oddometer: 518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky TFS View Post
To stir the pot even MORE, MORE AND MORE!!!!!
OK, so I tried it. In BC, all intermediate points were greyed out (don't alert), as indicated.


Sent it to the Montana 600 version 4.60, initial profile direct routing with topo. Looked at it in the route planner, all 10 points shown. Cancelled navigation.


Changed profile to automobile, disabled CNNA, leaving only the global basemap. Set satellite to use with GPS off.
Reset position to somewhere near Frankfurt, Germany.

Started up the route again, got the message "do you want to simulate this route" said "yes".


NOW it gets interesting: The GPS starts simulating the route, but in the nuvi dashboard, there is NO next point info, it's just a blank green field. Click on it and the route directions come up, but THEY are nothing but a thin line in each box, except the end point, as named in the file. The car is apparently following the route although I didn't wait for it to finish.


OK so this is not a good test, we need someone with CNEU 2013.3 to simulate the route. However, there is SOME indication that the Montana is treating these intermediate points as shaping points. When you click on the green box at the top of the Nuvi dash and start paging down, there are at least a hundred of those blank lines before you see the end point.


The OP's bit about the last three points not being at a crossroad but on the road and therefore are via points may be a red herring , since none of them showed on the Montana when looking at the route directions only the first and last as in the properties window in BC.


It just keeps getting curiouser....


OK, next question is "What is different about this guys route from the ones we all have tried over and over with greyed out shaping points, or whatever you want to call them, that still showed up on the Montana as via points with blue pins????" AAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH

EDIT: I could not reproduce this behavior with the blank green next point field in the US using just the basemap and a 46 point route that I greyed out all intermediate points to not alert, so it could be another red herring. We need someone with CNEU to try the original file.

OR MAYBE A PROGRAMMER WHO IS REALLY GOOD WITH XML!!

Rocky TFS screwed with this post 02-10-2013 at 03:29 PM
Rocky TFS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 08:39 PM   #23
Ken in Regina
Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Regina, SK, Canada
Oddometer: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by snooker View Post
I'd still really like to understand the answer to this last question. It seems to me I read that a big benefit of the Montana is that it would not change (re-calculate) your routes from BaseCamp. I assume this means that you make a route in BaseCamp in a NON-Direct mode so it is routes just like you wanted it, then when you put it onto the Montana it does not re-calculate a route at all, but somehow just uses the old one? Because we KNOW if you use a BaseCamp Direct route then the Montana would have to re-calculate the route. (All of this topic assumes the Montana is in a Non-Direct activity profile).

I would imagine though that this is NOT true, and that instead the Montana ALWAYS calculates a route in its own firmware/software, and the result is based on: 1) the data in the autoroutable mapset enabled on the Montana, 2) all the various types of Via Points (i.e. input requests) provided in the route requested, and 3) the Activity Profile selected, including the Setup->Routing settings on the Montana for: Calculation Method and Avoidance Setup (which has a lot of choices in it).

So I would imagine it is possible that if all the above 3 settings are identical between BaseCamp and the Montana that you *could* get the same route on the Montana. But not so fast! Another variable is the Montana Firmware (and version) and how its autorouting algorithm compares with the one in BaseCamp.

Correct me if I'm wrong, and what is the Realities of this situation? I know a lot has been posted on this and I'd love to capture that in this thread for "posterity"...
The simple answer is that all Garmin personal navigation devices will recalculate the route rather than use the exact route transferred from the PC program. If the Montana does not, it is the exception.

Caveat: I do not own a Montana but I have spent years hanging out in the Garmin fora (I'm the KGANSHIRT whose old point definitions have been quoted here) and so far I have not seen any models that will use a route without first recalculating it.

Just so I don't violate the rules, this is based on the conditions that at the time you activate the route (eg. tap the GO button) the navigation device is using maps containing routing data and is set to a routing (non-Direct) profile/activity.

As a minor postscript, the Montana 650 is on my purchase list once riding weather returns to the Great White North. It will replace the eTrex Legend HCx on my BMW F650GS.

...ken...
Ken in Regina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 08:48 PM   #24
Ken in Regina
Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Regina, SK, Canada
Oddometer: 22
Ooops, I missed the point about whether the recalculated route would be identical to the route that Basecamp calculated.

There is much evidence to indicate that there are differences between the routing calculations coded in Basecamp versus the way they are coded in the navigation devices. And also differences between various models of the devices. So you should not be surprised if you get some differences even if the same map product and routing profile/activity are selected in both the device and Basecamp. The simpler and shorter the route, the higher the probability they will be the same.

...ken...
Ken in Regina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 09:34 PM   #25
snooker
AttitudeIsEverything
 
snooker's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Loveland, Colorado
Oddometer: 1,394
Thanks KGhanshirt for that very useful info.

Rocky, that's some confusing stuff...
__________________
Baja 2012 Ride Report ~~~ My 07 BMW G650 XCountry Thread | 03 Honda Shadow ACE 750 | 99 Honda XR400 ~~~

FindMeSpot ~~~ Spotwalla Baja Trip ~~~ Neduro Did Dakar!
snooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 06:39 AM   #26
Albie
Kool Aid poisoner
 
Albie's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Upstate SC
Oddometer: 8,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken in Regina View Post
The simple answer is that all Garmin personal navigation devices will recalculate the route rather than use the exact route transferred from the PC program. If the Montana does not, it is the exception.

Caveat: I do not own a Montana but I have spent years hanging out in the Garmin fora (I'm the KGANSHIRT whose old point definitions have been quoted here) and so far I have not seen any models that will use a route without first recalculating it.

Just so I don't violate the rules, this is based on the conditions that at the time you activate the route (eg. tap the GO button) the navigation device is using maps containing routing data and is set to a routing (non-Direct) profile/activity.

As a minor postscript, the Montana 650 is on my purchase list once riding weather returns to the Great White North. It will replace the eTrex Legend HCx on my BMW F650GS.

...ken...
One thing I've noticed over the years is that some units seem to be able to calculate the routes exactly as created while other units don't. The ZUMO, 478 and the Montana seem to do just fine, even the old Streetpilots.. I've never noticed a deviation between the created route and the navigated route while using those units.

Units like the Oregon, 76, 76cx on the other hand seemed to have issues almost always re-calculating differently then the created route.
__________________
Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun.

Another day, another foot injury!
Albie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 01:21 PM   #27
Rocky TFS
Studly Adventurer
 
Rocky TFS's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Location: Hailey, Idaho
Oddometer: 518
More from KGanshirt

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken in Regina View Post
Actually, shaping points have always been hidden on Garmin devices

Don't take my word for it. Do this test. Create a two point route (A to B) in Basecamp or Mapsource. Make sure there are a few turns necessary to get from A to B. Export the route to a GPX file and view it in your favorite XML viewer or a text editor like Notepad. You will see a bunch of shaping points in the route. Transfer that route into any (non-Zumo) Garmin nav device that supports loading routes. Activate the route and look at the map. You will only see points A and B disolayed. None of the shaping points you see in the GPX file will be displayed nor will they be announced ... except that the appropriate turns they mark will be announced, of course.
...ken....
OK, I just did the test with BC. Original route was a direct route with one via point. It exported to a .gpx file of about 5 Kbits, which only contained the usual xml stuff and the three points, as expected.

Then I removed the via point in the original route and switched it to Automotive activity in BC. This exported to a .gpx file of about 56 kbits, which contained the usual headers, etc. and about 280 lat/longs, none of which were specifically called shaping points in the xml viewer, just the start and finish were identified as via points. Upon simulating the route with CNNA and automobile routing, only the points where turns were necessary showed in the Nuvi dashboard's header field on the Montana and in the list of turns when that was clicked. (The only way you can see what points are in this route once transferred to the unit because you can't edit a follow-road route, only a direct one, unless you create it in the Montana.)

This is exactly what you indicated!!

So it seems to me that this all boils down to semantics, and both Garmin and us users penchant for not being explicit in our use of the terms. As Albie posted above, if you can see it, greyed or not, in the route properties box in BC, the Montana will treat it as a via point. Period.

Bottom Line: We cannot see shaping points in either BC or the Montana, only by looking at the gpx file with a viewer.

I know that for me, most of this confusion came from my years of experience with non routing GPS's, and thinking that I just HAD to put in a bunch of via points in order to make a route work more or less identically in BC or the Montana. Unfortunately, this is still true to some extent and varies a great deal depending on where your route is and what kind of roads you want it to be on. I've never had the least problem with the Montana and BC using CNNA to route me identically from major city to major city or most any town on secondary highways, but that's not what I bought this GPS for.

Maybe that's why they called it CITY NAVIGATOR!!
Rocky TFS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 12:06 AM   #28
snooker
AttitudeIsEverything
 
snooker's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Loveland, Colorado
Oddometer: 1,394
In order to include background information on Routing in this single thread, Ken in Regina has agreed that I can post his comments from the Montana thread over here in this routing thread, so I will post them here intact:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken in Regina View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by snooker View Post
Forgive me but there is ONE Montana routing question nobody has answered here... and I am still hoping to have an answer in this thread, so that I can quote it in the new routing thread as a fact to build on.

Regarding:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky TFS View Post
Here's another post from the BaseCamp forum, including response from a Developer:

I tried using shaping points in BaseCamp (won't alert, grayed out), but when I transfer the route to my Montana, while the route is as I created it, it is full of Via Points.
My question is...

After a route is on a Montana, how can you tell if you have Shaping Points on it or Via Points? I mean based on my earlier distinction between the 2 in BaseCamp, once it is on the Montana how can you tell which ones are Via Points vs. Shaping Points? What specifically are you looking at on the Montana?
Indirectly, I suppose. (Caveat: I do not number a Montana among my many Garmin devices.) If you can edit a route on the Montana the Via points would show up in the list. Shaping points would not show up in that list.

Just to clarify (confirm) a related issue; "Direct" means exactly, and only, to connect the dots (points) "as the crow flies". Do NOT try to follow any roads which may be in the path.

This definition applies to *everything* ... to Mapsource and Basecamp on the PC and to *all* Garmin navigation devices. Regardless what maps you have selected.

Just as you surmised from your testing. Eg. the Direct profile essentially tells the PC program or the nav device "Do not do any routing, regardless whether routing data is available."

...ken...
__________________
Baja 2012 Ride Report ~~~ My 07 BMW G650 XCountry Thread | 03 Honda Shadow ACE 750 | 99 Honda XR400 ~~~

FindMeSpot ~~~ Spotwalla Baja Trip ~~~ Neduro Did Dakar!
snooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 12:11 AM   #29
snooker
AttitudeIsEverything
 
snooker's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Loveland, Colorado
Oddometer: 1,394
And 1 more copied over:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken in Regina View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albie View Post
The whole shaping point thing was created because of ZUMO owners. They didn't want all the Via points cluttering up the map display, You can imagine how bad it looked having 300-400 via point flags being displayed in a couple hundred mile route. So Garmin created shaping points as a way to turn them off so they wouldn't display on the ZUMO's, and to make them non announcing. As far as I know, none of the other units outside of the ZUMO hide the shaping points. Of course with only a max of 50 points with the Montana, not like there's a lot of clutter anyway.
Actually, shaping points have always been hidden on Garmin devices. Except Zumos. Or at least in the 10 or so years I've been using Garmin products (iQue 3600, iQue 3600A, Mobile PC, Mobile XT, nRoute, GPS10x, eTrex Legend HCx, Nuvi 765T, Nuvi 255W, Nuvi 40). (My Approach G6 probably doesn't count cuz it's dedicated to the golf course.)

Don't take my word for it. Do this test. Create a two point route (A to B) in Basecamp or Mapsource. Make sure there are a few turns necessary to get from A to B. Export the route to a GPX file and view it in your favorite XML viewer or a text editor like Notepad. You will see a bunch of shaping points in the route. Transfer that route into any (non-Zumo) Garmin nav device that supports loading routes. Activate the route and look at the map. You will only see points A and B disolayed. None of the shaping points you see in the GPX file will be displayed nor will they be announced ... except that the appropriate turns they mark will be announced, of course.

Except on a Zumo.

When Garmin created the Zumo to support the sorts of off-the-beaten-path routing that motorcyclists and some RV travellers like to use, a side-effect of the way they implemented some of the features was that shaping points became visible, in all respects, eg. they showed up on the map display and they were announced just like waypoints or POIs used in the route.

This, of course, was an undesirable side-effect so a workaround had to be devised.

The "shaping point" and "via point" terminology has existed in the Garmin vocabulary for a very long time. But it had to be added to the GPX spec so the Zumo could distinguish them and handle them appropriately. And, of course, the code had to be added to the Zumos.

The side-effect is that the features can now be used in devices like the Montana and future devices aimed at folks like us who like to travel like cats. :)

...ken....
__________________
Baja 2012 Ride Report ~~~ My 07 BMW G650 XCountry Thread | 03 Honda Shadow ACE 750 | 99 Honda XR400 ~~~

FindMeSpot ~~~ Spotwalla Baja Trip ~~~ Neduro Did Dakar!
snooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 01:19 AM   #30
snooker
AttitudeIsEverything
 
snooker's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Loveland, Colorado
Oddometer: 1,394
Now for some of my observations.

I am not agreeing with some of this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken in Regina View Post
(Caveat: I do not number a Montana among my many Garmin devices.) If you can edit a route on the Montana the Via points would show up in the list. Shaping points would not show up in that list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken in Regina View Post
...None of the shaping points you see in the GPX file will be displayed nor will they be announced...
I don't think this is true IF the route was set to Direct in BC before moving it to the Montana (for a Non-Direct auto-routing usage), which is often a recommended way to use them. So you probably were not talking about this case? See below...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky TFS View Post
The only way you can see what points are in this route once transferred to the unit because you can't edit a follow-road route, only a direct one, unless you create it in the Montana.)
1. Ok this makes sense and I think what you are saying is that on the Montana, if you go into Route Planner, select a Route, then you will only see the "Edit Route" choice if that route was set as Direct in BaseCamp when you transferred it to the Montana.

When I do this for a Direct Route in BaseCamp that has 2 Waypoints + 48 greyed out Shaping Points, then you can see all 50 points listed line by line in Edit Route on the Montana. So the Montana is treating Shaping Points from BaseCamp as unannounced Via Points.

So I really don't agree with Ken because they all show up in the list under Edit Route in this case:



2. However if instead it is a Non-Direct Route in BaseCamp then on the Montana (with autorouting on) you cannot get the "Edit Route" choice, so the only way to see the points in the route is to navigate the route then look at the top of Nuvi mode and click on the list of turns at the top. Here I agree the original haping points do not usually show up, instead it is the calculated "hidden" points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky TFS View Post
So it seems to me that this all boils down to semantics, and both Garmin and us users penchant for not being explicit in our use of the terms. As Albie posted above, if you can see it, greyed or not, in the route properties box in BC, the Montana will treat it as a via point. Period.
Yes I agree, but an "unannounced" Via Point. So despite all my efforts at naming things, these may be a Shaping Point in BC but are treated as an unannounced Via Point on the Montana.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky TFS View Post
Bottom Line: We cannot see shaping points in either BC or the Montana, only by looking at the gpx file with a viewer.
Well I don't understand what you mean by "we cannot see shaping points". See points on a map vs. See items in a list?? In BC they all show up as dots on the map and as greyed out Via Points under Properties, so are seen in both places...
And on the Montana they all show up on the map as those "annoying" little blue markers right? but they don't show up in the Edit Route list unless it was a Direct route from BC. ?
__________________
Baja 2012 Ride Report ~~~ My 07 BMW G650 XCountry Thread | 03 Honda Shadow ACE 750 | 99 Honda XR400 ~~~

FindMeSpot ~~~ Spotwalla Baja Trip ~~~ Neduro Did Dakar!
snooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 12:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014