Jump to content

What Would AI2 Have Looked Like?


tacovini

Recommended Posts

Don't fix what's not broken. Leave AI as it is.

Originally I was building an AIX car. Then a few started to build really pissed off engines. I'm not building another engine so I changed a few things on the car to run a different class.

Todd says 20 to 30 cars would have to tone it down in AIX if there was a power to weight for the class. I just don't buy that. Really, that many cars under a 4.5 to 1 ratio. There's just not that many people that want to run such hi power levels. How far have the AIX car counts dropped off. I know here on the West Bank there was only about 4 cars that ran last year and thats a hit and miss situation. This is the class that needs fixing. I don't mean to piss on any one's parade but its better to have 3 or 4 cars tone down than watch the class go extinct.

There just no way a 1000hp is the same cost to run as 600. Your not fooling anyone with that statement (from an AIX competitor).

AI2 sounds good but come on, is that going to bring anyone into AI. The class is just not healthy enough for that.

I guess I'll just stay outside looking in. If some things change then I'll "PONY UP". Besides it realy doesn't matter what I think anyway, does it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 179
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • robbodleimages

    25

  • D Algozine

    16

  • Tommy55

    9

  • nape

    9

Pantera1889
1st, WOW where did this come from? This is the tail wagging the dog. If Nasa has a vision of a new class then great but don’t do it at the expense of an existing class.

 

2nd, THE AI RULE SET IS WORKING!! Where are the complaints coming from? All I have heard is the idea that the S197 is better than the GM cars because of the abs. This doesn’t warrant another class. If our (AI) goal is to evolve with the times then a minor PtoW change may be needed, but lets not work in a vacuum lets consider CMC (as a whole, combined to 1 class) and AIX which has been failing because the X ='s $$$. The only way AI2 maxes any sense is as a replacement for AIX. Where are all of the cars for this new class?

 

3rd, The CMC split experiment was a huge mistake lets not do it again in AI. I hope that the CMC world doesn’t claim it to be a success when both classes have really struggled. The AI field will follow a minor power to weight change if it is phased in and announced properly.

 

4th, My offer to all of you is this, 3 classes.

1. AIX reined in to allow people to run bigger power & tires & such. Without having to be so loaded.

2. AI as it is with fewer body mods & a minor power bump (8:1). We can talk about ABS if we have to.

3. AI Challenge (formerly CMC2) which would allow for all of the current cmc cars plus some new ones (GTO T’Bird etc) and some of the previous limited prep AI cars that don’t want to chase the new AI cars can back up a bit. On a side note the V6 versions of the Camaro & Mustang fit this class too. (cool new cars)

 

Robin Burnett

 

 

+19

This is exactly what I would have written. Almost to the letter!

 

Ron

Link to post
Share on other sites

There just no way a 1000hp is the same cost to run as 600. Your not fooling anyone with that statement (from an AIX competitor).

 

I think you need to re-read what I said. Here is a portion:

 

IMO the perception that 850hp cost a lot more than 600 is an uneducated one. I have at least a dozen customers that are making 700-800rwhp in their street cars on pump gas. Quite a few of them on stock motors with upgraded superchargers. My engine and supercharger is strait out of the Ford Racing catalog and can be purchased for less than $15,000 including the supercharger. If you want to do it real cheap build a GM LS motor. You can buy one from the junkyard for $2000, put that much again in it for rods and pistons, slap a turbo on it and you are making 800RWHP for less than $10,000 if you do it right.

 

My point is if you do it right you can build a competitive AIX car for what some people are spending on their AI cars.

Would you like me to write you up a quote to prove it? Did you read what Chris (AIX Nat champion BTW) has in his car?

 

This is supposed to be about AI2. Lets stay focused.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t want to be the one that puts a cork in this but at some point we should sum it all up. Short of one or two posts no one is in favor of this AI2 idea. If there is a desire to pick up the pace in AI so newer cars fit in more easily then lets call it what it is and do that. If manufacturers see AI as a place to show off their stuff then that is better for all of us. Not because of sponsors or anything like that but because we have more people to race with.

 

As a budget minded racer (read as cheap ass) (aka. broke SOB) I still believe that a well driven old fox Mustang should still be included in all of the decisions to move forward. It disturbs me that Wheeler, Tommy, Mike & other GM guys are looking elsewhere, let’s fix that. The S197 is a god send for racers and a curse at the same time. We can’t let it be a one car class.

 

AI items to look at to include any new AI2 level / pro cars that may come. (no new class)

• Increase P to W ratio (8.5:1ish)

• ABS gets +100lbs (hate this because I finally have it but lets get the GM guys back)

• 10in wheels get +50lbs (still using 275 tires)

• Fox Mustangs get -50lbs if they stay narrow (I hate the clown car look with big a$$ flares, Stock appearing please)

• Anything else????

 

Perceived class structure issues

• AIX is great for those 10 people with the real cars and for those who just want some more motor and less stress than competing in a 15 car AI field. Reined in or not it will always be a lesser part of the overall equation.

• AI (see above) Also, This is the flagship brand, we all knew it would get more complicated as time went on, old cars, new cars, technology and competition have all put pressure on us to keep it “fair”. We have done a good job up to now. People (like these Pros & Manufacturers) are looking at us as a place to run but they don’t want to rebuild to fit in. Well neither do we! There is a middle ground lets go there. (see above)

• CMC needs to be folded into the AI umbrella (AI Challenge, Stock AI, AI Light) or something. It could even keep the CMC name as long as its place in the group is established. Like AI CMC is in need of some changes that will allow for some newer cars. It will cause some changes to the existing cars but as in AI its better to race in a crowd than lap by yourself. This should be the easiest car in the world to build a recipe for each car should be available and it should make them as equal as possible. Modified older cars, minor restrictions to others and an opening up to allow the newer V6 cars when they get here. This is the single most important class in the Nasa brand line up for us AI types. It’s the feeding ground for the other 2. There should be 20 cmc cars at any event that has 10 AI cars. This should be our goal too.

 

Sorry for the length of this, I’ve already been involved with the demise of one series (scca Asedan) I don’t want to see that happen here.

 

Robin

(off the soap box)

Link to post
Share on other sites
robbodleimages

prices go up and down, but the last time i checked 275/40-17 RA1's cost $227 at APP Tire. 275/35-18 cost $358 per tire. of course there is no price listed when i checked today because they are no longer available to buy. The cost of a the BFG 275-17 is $234 at Tire Rack and the 18 is $268 for comparison. I could be wrong but the cost of a Pirelli PZero Slick in the 285/18" Mustang size is about the same as the Toyo before shaving costs.

 

I'd like to suggest that if I have to pay a $500 penalty to run the size wheel that my car was engineer for that I get my 150lbs weight penalty back for my ABS and 10" wheels.

 

BTW....Todd and the NASA Chief's tent that price increase for 17-18 is not a good advertisement for Toyo as being AI and NASA friendly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don’t want to be the one that puts a cork in this but at some point we should sum it all up. Short of one or two posts no one is in favor of this AI2 idea. If there is a desire to pick up the pace in AI so newer cars fit in more easily then lets call it what it is and do that. If manufacturers see AI as a place to show off their stuff then that is better for all of us. Not because of sponsors or anything like that but because we have more people to race with.

 

As a budget minded racer (read as cheap ass) (aka. broke SOB) I still believe that a well driven old fox Mustang should still be included in all of the decisions to move forward. It disturbs me that Wheeler, Tommy, Mike & other GM guys are looking elsewhere, let’s fix that. The S197 is a god send for racers and a curse at the same time. We can’t let it be a one car class.

 

AI items to look at to include any new AI2 level / pro cars that may come. (no new class)

• Increase P to W ratio (8.5:1ish)

• ABS gets +100lbs (hate this because I finally have it but lets get the GM guys back)

• 10in wheels get +50lbs (still using 275 tires)

• Fox Mustangs get -50lbs if they stay narrow (I hate the clown car look with big a$$ flares, Stock appearing please)

• Anything else????

 

Perceived class structure issues

• AIX is great for those 10 people with the real cars and for those who just want some more motor and less stress than competing in a 15 car AI field. Reined in or not it will always be a lesser part of the overall equation.

• AI (see above) Also, This is the flagship brand, we all knew it would get more complicated as time went on, old cars, new cars, technology and competition have all put pressure on us to keep it “fair”. We have done a good job up to now. People (like these Pros & Manufacturers) are looking at us as a place to run but they don’t want to rebuild to fit in. Well neither do we! There is a middle ground lets go there. (see above)

• CMC needs to be folded into the AI umbrella (AI Challenge, Stock AI, AI Light) or something. It could even keep the CMC name as long as its place in the group is established. Like AI CMC is in need of some changes that will allow for some newer cars. It will cause some changes to the existing cars but as in AI its better to race in a crowd than lap by yourself. This should be the easiest car in the world to build a recipe for each car should be available and it should make them as equal as possible. Modified older cars, minor restrictions to others and an opening up to allow the newer V6 cars when they get here. This is the single most important class in the Nasa brand line up for us AI types. It’s the feeding ground for the other 2. There should be 20 cmc cars at any event that has 10 AI cars. This should be our goal too.

 

Sorry for the length of this, I’ve already been involved with the demise of one series (scca Asedan) I don’t want to see that happen here.

 

Robin

(off the soap box)

 

You're good. You're very good. My lords, my ladies, and everybody else here not sitting on a cushion! Today... today, you find yourselves equals. For you are all equally blessed. For I have the pride, the privilege, nay, the pleasure of introducing to you to a knight, sired by knights. A knight who can trace his lineage back beyond Charlemagne. I first met him atop a mountain near Jerusalem, praying to God, asking his forgiveness for the Saracen blood spilt by his sword. Next, he amazed me still further in Italy when he saved a fatherless beauty from the would-be ravishing of her dreadful Turkish uncle. In Greece he spent a year in silence just to better understand the sound of a whisper. And so without further gilding the lily and with no more ado, I give to you, the seeker of serenity, the protector of Italian virginity, the enforcer of our Lord God, the one, the only, Sir Robin Burnett!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaron, very funny stuff. Quoting Bill Murray, " NEVER lose your sense of humor"

 

Robin, Once again, niclely stated.

 

My ABS proposal options:

1) Eliminate any/all race versions of ABS. Figure out a reliable method to check. Must be enforceable or it's useless

2) Significant weight penalty for any/all race versions of ABS. Figure out a reliable method to check. Must be enforceable or it's useless.

 

If we cant figure out a way to check and enforce for either #'s 1 & 2, then.....see #3

 

3) Eliminate ALL ABS

 

For all the bitching I've done about eliminating ABS, my new car does have the stock ABS. Big differnce between a stock ABS and a race version (Not looking to start this debate again, just giving my opinion).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent discussion and feedback! (aside from a few personal snipes)

 

Another reminder, is that the whole concept of AI2 was solely borne out of the notion that nobody wanted to do what essentially Robin (and the original LT rules package) suggested. (raise power and accomodate modern cars). We can relook at our 2012/2013 plans vs. AI2 if that is in the best interest.

 

We MUST, however, take the newer cars into consideration NOW (or very soon), so that in the future, the series is sustainable. We don't want to wait for there to be a problem, because it's too late then. (You don't wait for people to retire at 55 and then try to decide who to hire to fill the position...it's just bad business.)

 

So either there are an equal and opposite number of silent people who oppose "Sir Robin's Plan", or someone ate the canary(s)!

 

img104.jpg

 

I'm off to the track for the weekend and off the boards for the most part. We'll continue to work this with your input. Please keep it civil. In the meantime, remember the 2011 rules are essentailly no different than the 2010 rules. (The ABS and other "problems" continue to be evaluated. Hang in there, Chevy guys!)

 

Silly Season didn't end...we're working it now for next year!

 

-=- T

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of a AI2 . I like the thoughts that some have about moving abs and wings ,more hp and a open tire into it . sort of like a aix but put a cap on it for hp. I for one would like a bigger faster car but aix is not a option for what some are bringing out on the track in aix for it to be even fun.

 

let cmc cmc2 come play under the AI name. pull back a little on AI rules. "do away with big areo and abs" move that all into ai2 along with more hp and tire options.wider like 10" wheels.

 

basically I would see ai2 as the new aix. Course you could have just done that with aix rules but I understand about that not being fair to the few "couple" that run in aix now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We MUST, however, take the newer cars into consideration NOW (or very soon), so that in the future, the series is sustainable. We don't want to wait for there to be a problem, because it's too late then. (You don't wait for people to retire at 55 and then try to decide who to hire to fill the position...it's just bad business.)

-=- T

I don't understand this statement.

 

 

In the State of the Union you said:

 

On the other end of the series spectrum, another long term goal is to make changes such that the entry level racer with a modern ponycar could more easily step into AI with minimal mods to their street car.

 

The power that the new 5.0 Mustangs and LS3 Camaros are making stock puts them real close to the 9.5:1 power number that we currently run under. I'm not real sure what Brians Camaro weighs with him in it but I would be impressed if it was much less than 3400. So maybe you need to pull 10hp out of your new AI car that you just built. That can be done EXTREMELY cheap.

Now, if you up the power level to 8:1 your 3400# AI car needs 425RWHP which is going to take headers ($1500 for good stainless long tubes), intake ($500+), throttle body ($300-$400) and possibly more depending on which platform we are talking about.

 

So my point is right now a guy building a new AI car needs to spend next to no money on his engine to make legal power.

If we up the power level the new guys will HAVE to spend money to make competitive power not to mention everyone else that has built to the 9.5:1 rule.

 

If everyone wants more power then so be it but don't make the change thinking that you are making it easier for new cars to come and race.

Link to post
Share on other sites
firehawkclone
Excellent discussion and feedback! (aside from a few personal snipes)

 

Another reminder, is that the whole concept of AI2 was solely borne out of the notion that nobody wanted to do what essentially Robin (and the original LT rules package) suggested. (raise power and accomodate modern cars). We can relook at our 2012/2013 plans vs. AI2 if that is in the best interest.

 

We MUST, however, take the newer cars into consideration NOW (or very soon), so that in the future, the series is sustainable. We don't want to wait for there to be a problem, because it's too late then. (You don't wait for people to retire at 55 and then try to decide who to hire to fill the position...it's just bad business.)

 

So either there are an equal and opposite number of silent people who oppose "Sir Robin's Plan", or someone ate the canary(s)!

 

img104.jpg

 

I'm off to the track for the weekend and off the boards for the most part. We'll continue to work this with your input. Please keep it civil. In the meantime, remember the 2011 rules are essentailly no different than the 2010 rules. (The ABS and other "problems" continue to be evaluated. Hang in there, Chevy guys!)

 

Silly Season didn't end...we're working it now for next year!

 

-=- T

 

We have been hanging in there, for years now! It's pretty clear some of us are done waiting! I kinda hope all GM car's boycott the year! Then maybe will see something done!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the idea of a AI2 . I like the thoughts that some have about moving abs and wings ,more hp and a open tire into it . sort of like a aix but put a cap on it for hp. I for one would like a bigger faster car but aix is not a option for what some are bringing out on the track in aix for it to be even fun.

 

let cmc cmc2 come play under the AI name. pull back a little on AI rules. "do away with big areo and abs" move that all into ai2 along with more hp and tire options.wider like 10" wheels.

 

basically I would see ai2 as the new aix. Course you could have just done that with aix rules but I understand about that not being fair to the few "couple" that run in aix now.

 

 

Steve,

My brother you're killing me. You are the very and I mean the VERY best at finding a deal and building a modern car cheap. But lets think about the rest of us fools out here. Yes your new cars a capable of more power than most of ours (5.0) and yes those new ford racing 10in wheels would be great but why create a class just for you, Dean, Desalvo and some other World challenge capable cars. Come race with us! We apparently would meet you half way on power to weight and the aero is a simple unbolt. I dont think you have ever run an open tire class because it is a cost escalator. Unless you have more money than you let on stick to the spec tire series.

 

Please take no offense to this but pick a class and stick with it. I remember years ago you had the cream cycle car, you kept changing it to make it not fit any class. Don't ask for that again. Think about what everyone can build not what you can build.

 

Wheeler, GM boys

I don't know what to say to you guys. Seems to be some long term issue that have you wishing ill of the class. To have no GM cars would be a shame and if its just for abs then I think you have made your point, but really. The GM cars were good at the nationals what gives?

 

Sorry to get off topic I don't see how another class or moving classes helps the racing. Please PM any personal comments so as not to hijack the thread.

 

Robin

Link to post
Share on other sites
robbodleimages

Robin...just a thought. How does that half way on power to weight actually workout when you add in the weight penalties?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Robin...just a thought. How does that half way on power to weight actually workout when you add in the weight penalties?

 

Assuming a 3500lb car with ABS and 10" wheels, you would have 9.1 P/W taking the 150lbs penalty.

 

Honestly, most people might have to add 50lbs to take a 150lb penalty. How many of you run the car within 100lbs of your dyno sheet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the plan to make concessions ( AI2 ) for new stock muscle cars, or make a home for existing race cars from other series? And the idea of making this kind of drastic change, just so we can create a place for old and/or used cars from other series, just seems very strange. How about the current and existing racers?

 

It doesn't appear to be to difficult to build a very capable new Mustang or Camaro. Not sure if anyone has tried a new Challenger. For the weight of these new cars, the stock engines are pretty close to ideal HP to weight. Again, slight bump in HP would be simple, if needed. So what is it about the current rule set that the new breed of cars needs so they can be AI legal and highly competitive? 9.5 inch rims appear to work on these cars. What am I missing? Don't all real AI race cars start as a completely stripped shell? I suppose if we all had $80k - $125k we could buy one of Fords race cars, but I can't imagine amateurs lining up to spend that money. And used $125k cars can simply comply, like the rest of the AI field.

The idea of being able to buy a car off the showroom floor, put a cage in it, and go racing, sounds more like CMC then AI. What happen to the AI mission statement about aftermarket participation, and engineering ingenuity?

Link to post
Share on other sites
robbodleimages

My first AI car was a former GS 95 Cobra R. It was a ready made AI car when I got it. I didnt spend a lot of money for it.

 

My current AI car is an FR500C that I bought in pieces and got put back together. The numbers you are posting up are not close to what I have invested in my car.

 

and....the aftermarket thing. with the new cars at ai specs already, you would think to make room for aftermarket upgrades you would have to bump the performance numbers for the class.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My first AI car was a former GS 95 Cobra R. It was a ready made AI car when I got it. I didnt spend a lot of money for it.

 

My current AI car is an FR500C that I bought in pieces and got put back together. The numbers you are posting up are not close to what I have invested in my car.

 

and....the aftermarket thing. with the new cars at ai specs already, you would think to make room for aftermarket upgrades you would have to bump the performance numbers for the class.

 

I think your making my point for me by indicating that cars from other race series can already, easily enter AI, so thats why I'm not sure why AI2 is needed.

Also, aftermarket means more then adding HP. It's control arms, shocks, springs, sway bars, panhards, three links, transmissions, rear ends, hoods, hatches, wings, splitters, etc...

Link to post
Share on other sites
robbodleimages

i am just reading between the lines. the current mustang platform is currently 6 years old going to 7 with the 2012 Boss 302 coming in short order.

 

there has been some stiff resistance from a goodly and respected portion of the AI community against things that characterize these cars.

 

robin has layed out some comprimises but there is still apparantly a move to boycott the class.

 

i could be comprehending mistakenly, but it appears that the AI2 suggestion is a move to placate the boycott movement and make everybody happy. instead everybody is unhappy. sounds about right.

 

its an interesting dilemma.

 

as to the aftermarket, thats true. its more than hp. as far as i can tell the arguments around rules adjustments for S197 mustangs has had nothing to do with HP. Its been brakes and wheels and things like that. i believe there has been discussion in these rules threads about the legality of the aftermarket transmissions that come on FR500C cars as illegal as well as the shocks that come on those cars. I think we've gone to some lenth here to make much of the available S197 aftermarket illegal.

 

correct me if i am wrong, but it seems that much of what ford racing has brought to the table has resulted in disagreements in this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
as to the aftermarket, thats true. its more than hp. as far as i can tell the arguments around rules adjustments for S197 mustangs has had nothing to do with HP. Its been brakes and wheels and things like that. i believe there has been discussion in these rules threads about the legality of the aftermarket transmissions that come on FR500C cars as illegal as well as the shocks that come on those cars. I think we've gone to some lenth here to make much of the available S197 aftermarket illegal.

 

correct me if i am wrong, but it seems that much of what ford racing has brought to the table has resulted in disagreements in this forum.

 

Rob, the biggest problem most people have with the rules and the fact that many are sick of the changes is that the rules keep being bent/changed to allow all the S197 speed parts. Take one of the most potent platforms in AI and keep giving it more advantages. It started with 18" wheels because there was a lack of 17" wheels for S197s and "they're heavy and need the bigger brakes" and the latest argument has been ABS. The transmissions were illegal, without a doubt, because they were over the dollar amount. Since then, the dollar amount was raised and the price of the transmission has come down. As far as shocks, I don't remember that one. Now it's that they need 10" wide wheels.

 

If the S197 is so great and the car to have, why does it need all these adjustments?

 

You are pretty bent out of shape about the 18" tire cost. Without the S197, we'd still all be on 17" wheels. Did I want the 18" wheels? Hell no. Am I going to take advantage of the performance? Absolutely.

 

None of the allowances to the S197 scare me, but it makes it a lot harder for other platforms to keep finding ways to keep up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
robbodleimages

TJ. Thats what I said. The S197 stock platform started the complaints. 14" brakes and 18" wheels.

It went on from there.

 

And so, Todd takes this upset and then takes the S197 to a new class to clear the issue. That starts a new issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The idea that S197's are Heavy is just bad build/prep, a guy in Texas had a S197 down to 31XX lbs four years ago!

 

Add a normal sized driver, adjust for power at the flywheel vs rear wheels, and you get 410 - 430 hp. Sounds about what Ford and Chevy are advertising for at the crank numbers.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rob, the biggest problem most people have with the rules and the fact that many are sick of the changes is that the rules keep being bent/changed to allow all the S197 speed parts. Take one of the most potent platforms in AI and keep giving it more advantages. It started with 18" wheels because there was a lack of 17" wheels for S197s and "they're heavy and need the bigger brakes" and the latest argument has been ABS. The transmissions were illegal, without a doubt, because they were over the dollar amount. Since then, the dollar amount was raised and the price of the transmission has come down. As far as shocks, I don't remember that one. Now it's that they need 10" wide wheels.

 

If the S197 is so great and the car to have, why does it need all these adjustments?

 

You are pretty bent out of shape about the 18" tire cost. Without the S197, we'd still all be on 17" wheels. Did I want the 18" wheels? Hell no. Am I going to take advantage of the performance? Absolutely.

 

None of the allowances to the S197 scare me, but it makes it a lot harder for other platforms to keep finding ways to keep up.

 

I agree. Pretty much sums it up for me.

 

To go one step further. It appears that questions of why these rules adjustment are necessary has never been answered well enough to make sense. And then to decide rather then correct or change the situation, the answer is to make a new class.

Link to post
Share on other sites
robbodleimages

"Without the S197, we'd still all be on 17" wheels. Did I want the 18" wheels? Hell no. Am I going to take advantage of the performance? Absolutely.

 

None of the allowances to the S197 scare me, but it makes it a lot harder for other platforms to keep finding ways to keep up."

 

here is the point. without the S197....this and that and so forth. Here is the basic question. Is American Iron where we race American Pony cars for now and the future or is it a class based on the cars that dominated the grid when the class came of age? Without the S197 isnt an option. Its there. The evolution of that car will only grow from here with the passage of time.

 

These questions of allowing the evolution or not will only increase as time goes by. The manufacturors and the aftermarket vendors are only going to be offering better and better stuff. The question is whether we evolve the class which means a consistant progress of the rules in step with time or whether we grow the class with a new class.

 

Today we appear to be in no man's land to an extent. Where are we going to be for the 2014 season?

That will be the 50th anniversary of the Mustang. I expect a new platform to be marketed at that time. At that time the SN95 chassis becomes 20 years old. The S197 will be 10 years old. Where Camaro will be by then is hard for me to guess, but I would imagine they will be into a 2nd gen of the 5th gen at least.

 

I think what Todd and NASA are bringing to the table is that quandry about where we will be by 2014.

 

If you had to choose, what would you pick?

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...