Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

High Oil Temps

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> TeamGrumman-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

airman(at)appledumplings.
Guest

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 6:17 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

Ok I went flying yesterday and the Oil temp climbed up to around 230  

again.

When just flying around in the airport area a few days before the  

temp stayed at 180-190. But I only flew for 20-30 min.



So Yesterday I flew around for about an hour. At first the temps  

stayed down but then they started to get up to 210-220 range.

I stopped and got some fuel. On my way back to my airport I noticed  

that the temps went up.  I was in cruise and I went to full rich to  

see if that would help and then i tried reducing power.  It steadiy  

increased. I think it may have have gone as high as 235 but was able  

to get it to stabilize around 230.



I previously  did some sealing on the baffle seals near the oil  

cooler and on both sides between the cylinders.  Does anyone have  

pictures of what the baffle/baffle seals should look . I am also  

considering redoing all the baffling and baffle seals ... are there  

kits?They dont look that great to my untrained eyes. What are the  

thoughts on oil coolers?

I know there are high dollar changes such as new cowlings and cowling  

mods but I think i should be able to get a handle with the stock  

config also(at least reasonable temps) ... with maybe a stcd oil cooler.



Thanks



Thomas  74225  D73

flyv35b(at)ashcreekwirele
Guest

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 6:51 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

 	  Quote: 	
		   Ok I went flying yesterday and the Oil temp climbed up to around 230 

 again.

 When just flying around in the airport area a few days before the  temp 

 stayed at 180-190. But I only flew for 20-30 min.



 So Yesterday I flew around for about an hour. At first the temps  stayed 

 down but then they started to get up to 210-220 range.

 I stopped and got some fuel. On my way back to my airport I noticed  that 

 the temps went up.  I was in cruise and I went to full rich to  see if 

 that would help and then i tried reducing power.  It steadiy  increased. I 

 think it may have have gone as high as 235 but was able  to get it to 

 stabilize around 230.



 I previously  did some sealing on the baffle seals near the oil  cooler 

 and on both sides between the cylinders.  Does anyone have  pictures of 

 what the baffle/baffle seals should look . I am also  considering redoing 

 all the baffling and baffle seals ... are there  kits?They dont look that 

 great to my untrained eyes. What are the  thoughts on oil coolers?

 I know there are high dollar changes such as new cowlings and cowling 

 mods but I think i should be able to get a handle with the stock  config 

 also(at least reasonable temps) ... with maybe a stcd oil cooler.


	


First off let me say it is very helpful if when you post a question or 

comment to say 1) what model of Grumman you have and 2) what engine it has, 

especially if is not stock or is modified in any way.  This has an important 

bearing on how the question is answered instead of trying to guess what the 

configuration is.  This applies even if you have previously stated this as 

some time may have elapsed and people forget. Heaven forbid!



One thing that jumps out is your comment about stopping for gas and then the 

oil temp climbed higher on the next leg of the flight.  This is exactly what 

I would expect it to do.  The engine sits on the ramp and heat soaks when 

you are stopped and then when climbing out at low airspeed it increases even 

further.  If you have a 2 place with the O-235-C2C engine it is pretty 

normal for the oil temp to run up near the redline on climb anytime the 

ambient is high.  Also, how was it outside when you were flying?  If you 

have a Tiger or Cheetah the oil temp will usually not run over 200F unless 

you have the HC engine conversion on the Cheetah and the stock cooler.  A 

larger Tiger cooler can be installed on a Cheetah.



Also, running rich or lean will not have very much impact on oil temperature 

as it can on cylinder head temperature.  Obviously, running with hotter 

cylinders will heat the oil up a bit more in time.  But it does take some 

time for the oil to react..  The front baffle seals on a Cheetah and Tiger 

that are hidden inside the nose bowl are every bit as important as the ones 

you can see on the side and rear of the engine.  The Cheetah is even harder 

to seal than the Tiger because of the jogs around the NACA air inlet duct.



Cliff  A&P/IA

airman(at)appledumplings.
Guest

Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:42 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

//First off let me say it is very helpful if when you post a question or

//comment to say 1) what model of Grumman you have and 2) what engine  

it has,

//especially if is not stock or is modified in any way.



Sorry,

I have a 76 tiger O-360-a4k.    Although in the last post I did say  

that the temps went up after a fuel stop. I originally saw the  

problem on  a longer trip with no stops.   I guess I just need to see  

what a tiger in good shape looks like under the cowling. Is there a  

site out there that has good pics of the baffle and baffle seals?  

Also is there anywhere to but a baffle kit?



The temps were around 86F outside.



I have had the airplane for 2 months and have flown about 12  

hours ... the problem seems to have come up in the last few hours.

in those 12 hours i have burned 1.5 quarts of oil. So this may be a  

contributer that has uncovered the problem. It now has 6.25 quarts.

I have had a few different CFI's in the plane as well as a grumman  

pfp cfi. And none of them noticed the higher temps so I dont think  

that i just didnt notice it earlier on(although the days were a bit  

cooler then).



Thanks Much for inputs



Thomas  74225 D73

flyv35b(at)ashcreekwirele
Guest

Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:24 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

My comment would be to first check your oil temperature gauge per the 

maintenance manual.  You should buy one if you don't already have one.  If 

the gauge is accurate then there is something amiss as Tigers typically 

don't run over 200 F, even with 90 F ambient temps.  Also, 8 hr/qt is not 

all that high oil consumption and not abnormal.  Have you checked your 

engine compression lately?  Your baffling could be a significant contributor 

but not to a recent sudden jump up in oil temperature.  You could have a 

defective vernatherm valve that is bypassing oil around the cooler or 

possible excessive piston ring blow by gasses that are heating up the oil.



Gary Vogt has some photos of baffling on his web site I believe 

(www.AuCountry.com).



Cliff  A&P/IA

---

GrummanDude

Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA

Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:03 pm Post subject: High Oil Temps

74225 is a 76 Tiger.

 

 OK, some questions.   

 

 1. Are your cooling exit ramps deteriorated and sagging?

 

 2. What do your baffles look like?   Look inside your air inlet and look to see how the baffle seal seals around the edges.

 

 3.   How old are your oil cooler hoses?   Were they professionaly made?   Do they have date tags on them?

 

 4.   Do you have a spin-on oil filter.   If so, is it a recent install?   or has it been on a while?   It is possible the Vernitherm is not sealing/opening correctly.   You should see an even imprint on the mating surface.

_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman

GrummanDude

Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA

Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:38 pm Post subject: High Oil Temps

In a message dated 6/12/06 6:47:38 AM, airman(at)appledumplings.com writes:

 

 

  	  Quote: 	
		  Is there a 

 site out there that has good pics of the baffle and baffle seals? 

 Also is there anywhere to but a baffle kit?

 	


 

 go to my web site,   www.AuCountry.com

 

 click on TeamGrumman

 

 Click on Restoration ....

 

 Scan down and look for Baffle Installation.

_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman

FLYaDIVE(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:13 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

In a message dated 6/12/2006 9:47:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, airman(at)appledumplings.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  The temps were around 86F outside.



I have had the airplane for 2 months and have flown about 12  

hours ... the problem seems to have come up in the last few hours.

in those 12 hours i have burned 1.5 quarts of oil. So this may be a  

contributer that has uncovered the problem. It now has 6.25 quarts.

I have had a few different CFI's in the plane as well as a grumman  

pfp cfi. And none of them noticed the higher temps so I dont think  

that i just didnt notice it earlier on(although the days were a bit  

cooler then).



Thanks Much for inputs



Thomas  74225 D73 	


 ==============================================

 Thomas:

  

 The oil usage is quite within the operating range.  If I add 6.25 + 1.5 = 7.75 Quarts ... That is a FULL load ... You should let the oil try to stabilize, let it get down to 5.5 to 6.5 quarts and see what the oil consumption is.  Many times when the oil is above 6 quarts and especially around 8 quarts the engine just pumps the excess oil over board.  Check your breather tube it should NOT be sticking out of the cowl more than 1.25".  I find 1" works well.

  

 Look at ALL your baffling or have someone with experience look at it.  As an owner you will become very familiar with what good baffling should look like since it is the major concern for cooling.  Have you flown the plane since the last time and have you noticed the oil temps?

  

 I once noticed a plane that sat for a few months.  It was started, taxied and had a run-up.  The oil temps jumped up to the high 200's during climb out and for a short time in S&L.  Then just as quickly dropped back down to the normal range of 180 - 190 F.

 I attributed this to maybe two things:

 1 - Dry metal inside the engine (the oil did not work its way to ALL the metal to metal contact areas) and

 2 - Maybe a stuck Vernatherm.

  

 So lets hear what the latest findings are.

  

  

  

 Barry

"Chop'd Liver"

GrummanDude

Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA

Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:52 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

In a message dated 6/13/06 7:10:51 AM, flyv35b(at)ashcreekwireless.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  > If you do need to go with new baffles-you might enjoy seeing what a great

 > start the RV   aircarft baffle can afford!

 Absolutely.  But they are very labor intensive to modify and install the

 front baffle ramps/seals and the seal behind the flywheel on a 2 place

 aircraft.  I must have about 60 hr of labor (or more) to install the

 complete set!  But the result is the best baffling I have ever seen on any

 Grumman.  It might even be possible to tailor or custom fit this type of

 baffling to a Cheetah and Tiger and eliminate the entire forward baffling!

 Wouldn't that be nice!

 I recently had the pleasure (sic) of spending an afternoon with the FAA and a DER.  The subject was my favorite topic, engine cooling.  Here is what I was asked and what I was told.

 Question:  Did you change the airflow in the lower cowling?

 Answer: (note: I tried to dodge the real question as long as possible)  No, I still have approximately the same pressure drop across the cylinders.

 Question:  Approximately.  So, the airflow in the lower cowling WAS changed?

 Answer: Honestly, I don't know.  (actually, this dialog went on for an hour or so with questions pointed toward the fact that it cools better.)

 the next round of Q&A went like this.

 Question: If you are cooling better, then that means the air in the lower cowling is warmer, is that correct.

 Answer:  I guess.

 Response:  Then we'll need a complete searies of tests with ALL of the accessories instrumented to determine that they are not overheating.

 Comment (me):  Am I to understand that if I do anything to improve the cooling over what was done at the factory, then I've changed the airflow through the cowling, and that requires complete testing of the temps in the lower cowling?

 Answer (FAA):  Yes.

 Comment (me):  Even on a stock cowling?  What if I trim a baffle and it makes the CHTs more even (lower differential between cylinders) and better cooling, then, that is a major modification to the cooling which affects temps in the lower cowling and that requires complete testing by the FAA?

 Answer (FAA):  Yes.

 Question (me):  What if the original baffles are no longer available, can I make new baffles?

 Answer (FAA):  Yes.  But, they must be exact duplicates.  And, you can't make them to sell to anyone else without an STC? 

 Question (me):  STC?  Why can't I get a PMA to reproduce the parts.

 Answer (FAA):  Because the drawings are not owned by you.

 This went on for 4 hours.  They (the FAA) are not concerned with improving anything.  They are only concerned with keeping everything exactly as it was when the plane was made; even if it was never designed correctly in the first place, the installation was done poorly and there is a better way to do it 30 years later.  Unless someone issues an AD.

 The bottom line is, the labor intensive installation of the RV baffle kit is only a fraction of the agony points required to improve the cooling on a Grumman.

 What's wrong with this picture?

_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman

bruce.smith(at)york.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:18 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

Gary,

This would be funny, if it weren't real life with the FAA. The thing I 

take from this is that the FAA isn't interested in safer either. Just 

the same.

A kit plane is starting to look really good.

Bruce Smith

TeamGrumman(at)aol.com said the following on 6/13/2006 2:49 PM:

 	  Quote: 	
		   In a message dated 6/13/06 7:10:51 AM, flyv35b(at)ashcreekwireless.com 

 writes:

> > If you do need to go with new baffles-you might enjoy seeing what a 

> great

> > start the RV   aircarft baffle can afford!

>

> Absolutely.  But they are very labor intensive to modify and install the

> front baffle ramps/seals and the seal behind the flywheel on a 2 place

> aircraft.  I must have about 60 hr of labor (or more) to install the

> complete set!  But the result is the best baffling I have ever seen 

> on any

> Grumman.  It might even be possible to tailor or custom fit this type of

> baffling to a Cheetah and Tiger and eliminate the entire forward 

> baffling!

> Wouldn't that be nice!

>

 I recently had the pleasure (sic) of spending an afternoon with the 

 FAA and a DER.  The subject was my favorite topic, engine cooling.  

 Here is what I was asked and what I was told.

 Question:  Did you change the airflow in the lower cowling?

 Answer: (note: I tried to dodge the real question as long as 

 possible)  No, I still have approximately the same pressure drop 

 across the cylinders.

 Question:  Approximately.  So, the airflow in the lower cowling WAS 

 changed?

 Answer: Honestly, I don't know.  (actually, this dialog went on for an 

 hour or so with questions pointed toward the fact that it cools better.)

 the next round of Q&A went like this.

 Question: If you are cooling better, then that means the air in the 

 lower cowling is warmer, is that correct.

 Answer:  I guess.

 Response:  Then we'll need a complete searies of tests with ALL of the 

 accessories instrumented to determine that they are not overheating.

 Comment (me):  Am I to understand that if I do anything to improve the 

 cooling over what was done at the factory, then I've changed the 

 airflow through the cowling, and that requires complete testing of the 

 temps in the lower cowling?

 Answer (FAA):  Yes.

 Comment (me):  Even on a stock cowling?  What if I trim a baffle and 

 it makes the CHTs more even (lower differential between cylinders) and 

 better cooling, then, that is a major modification to the cooling 

 which affects temps in the lower cowling and that requires complete 

 testing by the FAA?

 Answer (FAA):  Yes.

 Question (me):  What if the original baffles are no longer available, 

 can I make new baffles?

 Answer (FAA):  Yes.  But, they must be exact duplicates.  And, you 

 can't make them to sell to anyone else without an STC? 

 Question (me):  STC?  Why can't I get a PMA to reproduce the parts.

 Answer (FAA):  Because the drawings are not owned by you.

 This went on for 4 hours.  They (the FAA) are not concerned with 

 improving anything.  They are only concerned with keeping everything 

 exactly as it was when the plane was made; even if it was never 

 designed correctly in the first place, the installation was done 

 poorly and there is a better way to do it 30 years later.  Unless 

 someone issues an AD.

 The bottom line is, the labor intensive installation of the RV baffle 

 kit is only a fraction of the agony points required to improve the 

 cooling on a Grumman.

 What's wrong with this picture?

flyv35b(at)ashcreekwirele
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:19 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

All I have to say is this is very  sad!  And your conversation with the FAA shows how inflexible they are and  how little common sense there is and why so many people are gravitating to  experimental aircraft.  Not to mention that they are just better in many  ways, even though they don't have the FAA's blessing and haven't been tested as  extensively.

  

 Cliff

 [quote]   ---

bruce.smith(at)york.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:19 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

Gary,

One other thing. Let me surmise that the FAA types said this with 

serious looks on their faces. Right?

Bruce

TeamGrumman(at)aol.com said the following on 6/13/2006 2:49 PM:

 	  Quote: 	
		   In a message dated 6/13/06 7:10:51 AM, flyv35b(at)ashcreekwireless.com 

 writes:

> > If you do need to go with new baffles-you might enjoy seeing what a 

> great

> > start the RV   aircarft baffle can afford!

>

> Absolutely.  But they are very labor intensive to modify and install the

> front baffle ramps/seals and the seal behind the flywheel on a 2 place

> aircraft.  I must have about 60 hr of labor (or more) to install the

> complete set!  But the result is the best baffling I have ever seen 

> on any

> Grumman.  It might even be possible to tailor or custom fit this type of

> baffling to a Cheetah and Tiger and eliminate the entire forward 

> baffling!

> Wouldn't that be nice!

>

 I recently had the pleasure (sic) of spending an afternoon with the 

 FAA and a DER.  The subject was my favorite topic, engine cooling.  

 Here is what I was asked and what I was told.

 Question:  Did you change the airflow in the lower cowling?

 Answer: (note: I tried to dodge the real question as long as 

 possible)  No, I still have approximately the same pressure drop 

 across the cylinders.

 Question:  Approximately.  So, the airflow in the lower cowling WAS 

 changed?

 Answer: Honestly, I don't know.  (actually, this dialog went on for an 

 hour or so with questions pointed toward the fact that it cools better.)

 the next round of Q&A went like this.

 Question: If you are cooling better, then that means the air in the 

 lower cowling is warmer, is that correct.

 Answer:  I guess.

 Response:  Then we'll need a complete searies of tests with ALL of the 

 accessories instrumented to determine that they are not overheating.

 Comment (me):  Am I to understand that if I do anything to improve the 

 cooling over what was done at the factory, then I've changed the 

 airflow through the cowling, and that requires complete testing of the 

 temps in the lower cowling?

 Answer (FAA):  Yes.

 Comment (me):  Even on a stock cowling?  What if I trim a baffle and 

 it makes the CHTs more even (lower differential between cylinders) and 

 better cooling, then, that is a major modification to the cooling 

 which affects temps in the lower cowling and that requires complete 

 testing by the FAA?

 Answer (FAA):  Yes.

 Question (me):  What if the original baffles are no longer available, 

 can I make new baffles?

 Answer (FAA):  Yes.  But, they must be exact duplicates.  And, you 

 can't make them to sell to anyone else without an STC? 

 Question (me):  STC?  Why can't I get a PMA to reproduce the parts.

 Answer (FAA):  Because the drawings are not owned by you.

 This went on for 4 hours.  They (the FAA) are not concerned with 

 improving anything.  They are only concerned with keeping everything 

 exactly as it was when the plane was made; even if it was never 

 designed correctly in the first place, the installation was done 

 poorly and there is a better way to do it 30 years later.  Unless 

 someone issues an AD.

 The bottom line is, the labor intensive installation of the RV baffle 

 kit is only a fraction of the agony points required to improve the 

 cooling on a Grumman.

 What's wrong with this picture?

GrummanDude

Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA

Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:13 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

In a message dated 6/13/06 8:26:34 PM, bruce.smith(at)york.com writes:

 

 

  	  Quote: 	
		  Gary,

 

 One other thing. Let me surmise that the FAA types said this with

 serious looks on their faces. Right?

 

 Bruce

 	


 

 Dead serious

_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman

GrummanDude

Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA

Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:30 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

In a message dated 6/13/06 8:26:59 PM, flyv35b(at)ashcreekwireless.com writes:

 

  	  Quote: 	
		  Not to mention that they are just better in many ways, even though they don't have the FAA's blessing and haven't been tested as extensively.

 	


 

 I'm going to have to disagree on this one.   Certified planes aren't tested nearly as thoroughly as experimental airplanes.   I can safely say there was no testing done to optimise the engine cooling on the Tiger, Cheetah, etc, (or most any other plane).   

 

 Case in point:   Miley et al, in 1977, did a fine piece of experimental research at Mississippi State regarding cooling inlet design.   Look at any new certified plane.   With few exceptions, no one has incorporated any of the results of that work.   All they do is copy what was done before.   

 

 The FAA would like you to believe a lot of testing was done.   If that were the case, why are there so many new ADs on the new 172s?   Didn't Cessna work out all the bugs in the 40 to 50 years they built planes prior to the new Cessna?   

 

 I think experimental built airplanes are made and tested a lot more just to compete with certified planes.   If an experimental plane crashes, the FAAs response is, "See, experimentals are unsafe.   We should require certification for all planes."   

 

 PS, how many hours of experimenting do you think were spent optimizing the LoPresti nose bowl?   My guess is, none.   Round inlets were added to replace square inlets because everyone thought there was something magic about round inlets.   The baffle seals on round inlets don't seal as well as they do on the stock square inlets.   A lot of attention to detail is required to even come close to sealing the upper deck on a LoPresti nose bowl when compared to a stock nose bowl.

_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman

flyv35b(at)ashcreekwirele
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 6:04 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

Gary,  

  

 I pretty much agree  with  everything that you have said here.  But I think you misunderstood what I  meant about testing.  The certified aircraft have been pretty thoroughly  tested, but that doesn't mean the design or performance has been developed,  optimized or even refined.  It just means they met some FAA standard.   For instance, the cooling probably only has to not exceed 500 F at a Vy climb at  100 F ambient.  Which is not the same thing as saying it is a good cooling  system or can't be improved upon.  Far from it.

  

 And yes, there is a lot of  copying going on, even copying mistakes!  But also, you can't lump all  experimentals into one category when you imply that they are tested more or  better designed or developed.  There are quite a few experimentals  that are not well thought out or constructed.  The more well know ones like  Van's RV's and the Lancairs are well designed and very thoroughly tested and  refined, probably even more than certified aircraft except for the FAR Part 23  fatigue testing.  In the case of the RV's they have achieved the same level  of confidence with the thousands of aircraft flying hundreds of thousands of  hours.

  

 I don't think they are trying to  just compete with the certified aircraft, but rather take the performance,  efficiency and affordability to a whole new level.  And this includes  some pretty sophisticated avionics and autopilots that are far cheaper that  anything certified for use in certified aircraft.  I think right now about  10% of the fleet is experimental aircraft.  In 10 years it could be  20%.  That's where things are headed, especially if the FAA  tightens the noose with their ideas about aging aircraft safety, or lack  thereof.  

  

 And if you were developing a new  cowling for an experimental aircraft you wouldn't be having to prove to the FAA  that the magneto, fuel pump and vacuum pump case temperatures were higher or  lower than before you improved the cylinder cooling!

  

 Cliff   A&P/IA

 [quote]   ---

GrummanDude

Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA

Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 12:42 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

In a message dated 6/14/06 7:06:18 AM, flyv35b(at)ashcreekwireless.com writes:

 

 

  	  Quote: 	
		  There are quite a few experimentals that are not well thought out or constructed. 

 	


 

 OK, true enough.   There is one experimental at Fox field that no one will even try a high speed taxi with.   

 

 When I think of experimentals, I think of RVs, Lancairs, etc.

_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman

FLYaDIVE(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 1:28 am Post subject: High Oil Temps

In a message dated 6/15/2006 4:44:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, TeamGrumman(at)aol.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		    	  Quote: 	
		  There are quite a few experimentals that are not well thought out or constructed. 

	




OK, true enough.  There is one experimental at Fox field that no one will even try a high speed taxi with.  



When I think of experimentals, I think of RVs, Lancairs, etc.  	


 ========================================

 When talking experimental it is difficult not to consider the quality of the building.  Just because it is an RV does not mean it fly's like an RV.  And when you talk about "not well thought out", you MUST put Grumman's under that classification as well.

  

  

 Barry

"Chop'd Liver"

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> TeamGrumman-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum