Shooters Forum banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Several of us have been discussing the attributes of the 32 H&R cartridge. Our consensus was that we spend a lot of time talking about the big bores, leaving the mid-range cartridges somewhat underdiscussed. We're hoping a number of experienced folks will help us with this discussion.

I'll kick it off by suggesting the 32-20, 32 H&R, and 30 Carbine fit in this category. That immediately begs the question of "does the 38/357 fit that category also?" Certainly may well be others, particularly custom revolvers. Some may be lucky enough to have a Ruger .256 -- would like to hear about 'em.

My hands-on experience is limited to one afternoon of shooting a S&W 32 H&R that I found to be delightful. In Hamilton Bowen's "Custom Handguns", the author very highly praises the 32-20 capabilities -- nice accurate, flat shooting varmit gun. He also indicate the 30 Carbine competes well with the 32-20 and 32 H&R.

So, please help us out.

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
M141a,

Yes, and just how hard did you try to resist :)

Since the 38/357 combo isn't usually considered to be a member of the big-bore group, it would seem to fit the mid-range category ... and is a very capable performer.

The primary thing I noticed about the S&W 32 H&R I shot was it's reduced size. It was noticeably small than the 29s and 629s I have. Because this was my first exposure to this particular S&W model, I don't really know if it was smaller than the K-frame 38/357 S&W. But the smaller frame was a real pleasure to shoot and easier to hold out there for six shots. Additionally, I understand that the new Ruger 32-20 Vaquero is smaller than it's Blackhawk brother.

So for a person like me with small hands, the smaller revolver is easier and more enjoyable for handling purposes. And that's an advantage that would be worth while paying for. I just wish the new Ruger 32-20 was available in adjustable sights and I'd buy one right away.

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Well heck, "low end", "mid-range", and "big bore" categories appear to be too broad without breaking them down a little more. How about tackling “center fire cartridges used primarily for target and varmint size game.”

I’ll take a shot at listing qualified cartridges. I understand a number of these require handguns that are not currently available commercially. After we agree on the qualified cartridges, if we like, we can restrict the discussion to current or past commercially produced handgun cartridges. Just thought custom handgun cartridges might add some uncommon advantages.

22 Hornet, 218 Bee, 22 Jet, 25 ACP, 25 Flea (25 Special), 25 Hornet, 25-20 Winchester, 256 Winchester Magnum, 30 Carbine, 32-20 Winchester, 32 H&R, 38-40 and 38/357 Magnum. I realize I left the 9MM out, thinking the 38/357 covered that capability.

I did not include 10 MM, 41 Special, 41 Magnum, 44 Russian, 44 Special, and obviously the 44 Magnum and larger.

The list is a recommendation and not a unilateral decision. If you have additions and/or subtractions, please let us hear about them.  In the next post, I’ll use information from Hamilton Bowen’s “Custom Handguns” book to describe the 30 Carbine and 32-20 Winchester. Maybe we can use those descriptions for comparison purposes with other calibers?

Dan



<!--EDIT|DOK|May 12 2002,18:56-->
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Excerpt from “Custom Handguns”

30 Carbine:  “The 30 Carbine in civilian drag makes a credible varminter in a single-action revolver. Treated as a modern .32-20, the rimless .30 Carbine will shoot 100 to 120-grain bullets at 800 to 1600 fps in appropriately stout guns. Light .308 jacketed and half-jacketed bullets are plentiful and are good performers on small game and varmints when pushed to adequate velocities. The usual cast bullets suited to the .32-20 will also work well, although they may require sizing down slightly to bit .30 Carbine cylinder throats. Unlike the .32-20, Carbine brass is tough as nails, being especially thick in the neck and mouth area. Recoil is low, so the rimless design is no handicap as long as the case is aggressively sized to maintain the high neck tension required to give consistent performance with slow burning powders such as WW296 and H110.

The Ruger large-frame Blackhawk is the only production revolver suited to the little .30, and it may be retired from production eventually. The cartridge is capable of astounding performance, and every one known to the author has been wonderfully accurate with appropriate ammo. Fearsome muzzle blast probably did not boost the gun’s popularity nor did its ponderous size. The Old Model .357 receiver is better proportioned to the .30 Carbine caliber, appreciably smaller and lighter than the large-frame guns."

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Excerpt from "Custom Handguns"

".32-20 Winchester: The claim on the middle ground, however is a bit shakier. The .357 Magnum is by far the most popular of the high-performance medium bores. But beyond it's law enforcement applications, it’s popularity is not so well deserved. The .357 is at best a mediocre big-game cartridge and because it simply lacks the bullet weight and case capacity to dependably put down even deer-sized animals. Neither is it a superior small game and varmint cartridge since the light 110-grain bullets lack the sectional density and ballistic coefficient to provide good performance at longer ranges. The .32-20, on the other hand, is a perfect medium-bore cartridge. Loaded to blackpowder pressures, it is not a sparkling performer, but when loaded to rifle pressures in modern revolvers, such as the Ruger Blackhawk, its character changes dramatically. It will propel 100 to 120-grain bullets to 1500 to 1600 fps – equivalent to similar bullets in the .357—and shoot them flat as banjo strings. Even at 75 to 100 yards, the typical flat-point cast bullets visit wrath-of-god devastation on small varmints. The .32-20 harbors no pretensions of being a big-game cartridge and is consequently rarely abused as such. Recoil is mild—appreciably less than .357 Magnum loadings. But when loaded at magnum pressures, it delivers magnum muzzle blast. Loaded to more traditional performance levels, the .32-20 delivers mild .32 Smith & Wesson performance and report, which is perfect for training a new centerfire shooter or settling the hash of beer cans or pine cones.

If the .32-20 has any drawback at all, it is the flimsy cartridge case. The thin necks require great care in reloading.

Relegated to obscurity at the dawn of the magnum handgun era, the .32-20 merits rehabilitation. Treated as a modern cartridge, it is amazingly flexible and capable of extraordinary performance….”
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Alyeska338,

I agree, but we may want to allow the .357Magnum after reading about the .32-20 performance capabilities (see above)? Let me know what you think.

While reading the above comments on the .32-20, and the included comments on the .357 Magnum, it seemed to me that the .357 magnum handgun's ability to utilize the .38 cartridge was not considered. I would suggest the various .38 cartridges would supplement the .357 magnum handgun's ability to offer accurate, low recoil performance comparable to the low end .32-20. and 32 H&R loads.

Dan



<!--EDIT|DOK|May 13 2002,07:32-->
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
I found this 2 year old thread over on Shooters.com.

"I have been a 32 mag fan since it first came out. I have never owned or even fired a 32-20. I recently accqured a blackhawk convertable 32mag/32-20. I only shoot cast bullets. Can anyone give reasons why I should buy dies, molds and brass for the 32-20?

There's no good reason. That round is pretty hard to reload for. The Ruger may have a .308 bore diameter, so i'd check that out since you cast bullets. This also affects the 32mag resizing die. Paco Kelly has a good article on the 32-20 in the past issues at sixgunner.com. It's under the heading MegamagnumII. He's a shooter, not a gun writer. You might check it out.

I reload both and have to agree on what was posted before. There is nothing that the 32-20 can do that the .32 Magnum cannot do. I started loading the 32-20 (and hunting with it) in the mid-1960's though, and got my first .32 Magnum in the early 1990's, so I have a lot of history with the 32-20. In fact, earlier this year I finally found a S&W NewModel 16 in .32 Magnum and had it rechambered for 32-20. It works great. I have a S&W Model 631 J-frame for the .32 Magnum. The 32-20 is definitely harder to reload than the .32 Magnum. Not impossible, but there are a couple of more passes through dies and a lot more cases lost during reloading. It is also extremely finicky about powder type, charge, bullets, etc. The .32 Magnum is childs play to reload and is extremely forgiving. The only thing about it is that the Blackhawk is a lot bigger and heavier gun than is needed for the .32 Magnum.

Thanks for your answers. In the 50's I owned a k-22 & a k-38. About the time I decided I wanted a k-32, they stopped making them. I thought I would one day find one but never did. Left a void in my life. When Ruger made the 32mag, I jumped on a single six 4 3/4 and a small frame bisley 6 1/2 and order was restored to my life. In 85 I retired and moved to South Ga to small (27 houses) farming community with a lot of pecan groves whose owners were happy to have the bushy tail monsters elimated from their trees. They ate or stored 50-55 lbs of nuts a year each and at a loss of 75 cents to $1 per pound it really ads up. 32mag works great on them. 86 walked into gun show and found M16 83/8 and didn't know they were being made. Later on found 4" 16 on and 631 4". Few weeks ago I found unfired blackhawk convertable. Only a few were made on special order and I should have kept it as a collectable but if I own it I shoot it. Just didn' know if there would be any reason to start loading 32-20. I know I have more 32mag's than anyone needs, but I had to wait over 30 years for my k-32.


From your wealth of .32's I know you were joking about having more .32's than anyone needs. I don't have that many .32 Mags, but do have .32 Longs, 32-20's and .32 ACP's. I read people posting about the .454,.476, or even .500 handgun rounds and there is usually a lot of talking back and forth about it. I have NO doubt that I shoot my .32's a whole lot more than they do their guns. As you note, it is a perfect size for hunting squirrel and rabbit. I moved to a .32 when I found out that a HV .22LR could not be counted on to anchor a squirrel or rabbit with a chest shot from a 4" barrel (this was before hypervelocity rounds). The .22 is great in a rifle, but that was absolutely no challenge. If I could see it, I could hit it with my Marlin 39A with a Williams peepsight. I quickly moved to a handgun and shortly after that moved to a 32-20. A handgun is much more interesting and a .32 is just right for small game.

These pecan groves were located near a fairly swamp that had an unlimited supply of squirrels due to an unlimited food supply of nuts. At first I hunted them with a scoped Remington XP-100 221 Fireball and you could shoot from a distance, but it was not as much fun or as satisfying as open sights. Usuall you had to walk around the tree several times so the squirrel would get high enough on a smaller limb so you could get a shot. 22 just did not do the job as well as the 32M. When you retire, if you have not already, I hope you get a chance to return to your boyhood and roam the woods like I was lucky enough to do

Oh boy, I recently found an unfired bicentennial 30 Carbine Ruger (dot get excited, it aint unfired anymore) but I was wondering if the bore was suitable for 32-20 and 32 mag? One of yall mentioned that the others may have a 308 bore? How does this work? I am interested in additional cylinders if this works? I know that a lot of .312-4 rifle bores shoot .308 real well but this is in reverse? And those rats with furry tails cleaned out every one of my peach trees this year, been hammering them with a 12 gauge but I forget to lug it with me when I need it most. Am afraid to do a lot of banging around with that 30 carbine nowdays cause of the noise. I know the 32-20 doesn't make near as much racket, does the 32 mag?

The .30 Carbine bore is supposed to be 0.308". Paco says he has rechambered a couple of them to 32-20 with no problems. I once had a Thompson Contender barrel in 32-20 that had a 0.308" bore. It was indifferent as a shooter. Not downright bad (no better than my 1931 Colt PPS), but it was not nearly as good as the same gun in other calibers. The .32 Carbine started out as a 32-20 that was made rimless and had heavier case walls. Why don't you download that instead of changing it over.

The blackhawk has a slow twist true 32 cal bore. It is designed to use normal 32-20 or 32 H&R bullets, max 115gr. The Contender has a .308 bore, 1:10 twist and is designed to shoot rifle bullets. I have both the 30-20 and 30 H&R mag Contender barrels, and both of them will easily shoot 5 toughing at 50 yards and consistantly group under an inch at 100 (using a rifle scope of course). Normally they are fed the RCBS 165 silhouette bullet. But with the stubby 115gr. bullets they will do maybe 3 inches, not much better. Just gotta feed them what they like. Oh, BTW the 32-20 in a Blackhawk can be loaded to much higher velocities than a 32 H&R can, using the published HV92 loads in the back of the Accurate load book. But the brass doesn't last long at this level. H&R brass from Starline lasts forever as long as you don't get too carried away.

The bore and twist on the Contender barrel explain why it was best with heavy loads of slow burning rifle powder and heavy 0.308" pointed bullets (150gr plus or minus). Unfortunately, I like the 32-20 and have others in that caliber. You cannot use a "30-20" Contender cartridge in a 32-20 rifle (pointy bullets and overlength) or in a 32-20 revolver (overlength and too high a pressure). I think that Contender should have advertised it as a wildcat based on the 32-20 brass case. That would have been more honest."
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
A feature article by Paco....
32-20 WINCHESTER CENTERFIRE 1882

http://www.sixgunner.com/paco/3220.htm

The article contains loading data for what Paco calls the three different loading/performance levels.  Here are several brief excerpts:

"The very best and most accurate 32-20 handgun I have had and still have is the Ruger 30 carbine with the rechambered cylinder. With the 30 Carbine cylinder in 1978 I put 5 shots into the x-ring and 10 ring of a 25 yard bullseye target but at 100 yards. Younger eyes then, but the gun can still do it with both cylinders. Many say the 30 carbine Ruger when rechambered to 32-20 distorts the fired cases because the base of the 30 C is larger than the base of the 32-20. Not true in this case, because the 30 C rounds seat on their mouth in the S/A cylinder and slightly up and out of the chambers...so the 32-20 with it’s rim is a perfect fit. I have had a number of them rechambered and never had a problem."

"Standing on a cliff looking across a deep river (dry wash) bed to the cliff on the other side well over 250 yards or more...good friend Holt Bodinson and I were shooting at the opposite side in the late 1980s. He had a heavy loaded 357...I had the 30 Carbine Ruger. We saw every shot of mine hit and none of his. The drop difference in the two rounds was staggering...his rounds were going into the trees below the cliff...mine were chewing the cliff wall up. I load the 32-20 to the same specs in the Ruger S/As."
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Following is data from the Dan Wesson web site that certainly indicates that both 32 H&R and 32-20 is available in their small frame revolvers.

"The Dan Wesson Firearms New Generation Small Frame Series revolvers feature the famous interchangeable barrel assembly system (compatible with most previous build models), and are available in satin brushed stainless steel or black oxide blued carbon alloy steel in a variety of popular calibers.

Specifications:
six shot revolver, double and single action calibers available:
model 22/722 fires .22 Short, .22 Long and .22 Long Rifle; model 22M/722M fires .22 Win Magnum; model 32/732 fires .32 H&R Magnum, .32 S&W Long and .32 Colt New Police; model 3220/73220 fires .32-20; model 15/715 fires .38 Special and .357 Magnum.
trigger: smooth, wide tang (3/8") with overtravel adjustment
hammer: checkered wide spur (3/8") target-style with short double action travel
barrel: interchangeable - available in 2.5", 4", 6", 8" and 10" lengths
rifling (standard): six lands and grooves, right-hand twist, 1:18.75", ten lands and grooves, right hand twist, 1:18.75" for model 15/715 only (other twist rate options available for some calibers - see price list for details)
standard front sights: interchangeable .125" wide serrated ramp with color insert (red)
optional front sights: interchangeable .125" serrated ramp with colored insert (yellow, white, fluorescent orange, fluorescent yellow, fluorescent white); .100" wide patridge target (black-various heights) (see accessory price list for details)
standard rear sight:  graduated click screwdriver adjustable for windage and elevation wide notch black
optional rear sights: graduated click screwdriver adjustable for windage and elevation wide notch white outline or narrow notch black (see accessory price list for details)
standard grips: Hogue Monogrip finger groove black rubber Gripper Grips
optional grips: walnut undercover (checkered) ; zebrawood target (checkered); exotic hardwood fingergroove; laminated hardwood (Camo or Rosewood) fingergroove (see accessory price list for details)
engraving: laser (can be customized - check with dealer, distributor or factory for details)
weights: (all weights for models listed are for both carbon blued and stainless steel models with  vent heavy barrel assemblies)

Specifications

model # caliber 2.5" 4" 6" 8" 10"
22/722 .22 LR 36 oz. 41 oz. 47 oz. 54 oz. 58 oz.
22M/722M .22 Mag 36 oz. 41 oz. 47 oz. 54 oz. 58 oz.
32/732 .32 H&R Mag 35 oz. 40 oz. 46 oz. 53 oz. 57 oz.
3220/73220 .32-20 35 oz. 40 oz. 46 oz. 53 oz. 57 oz.
15/715 .357 Mag 32 oz. 37 oz. 42 oz. 47 oz. 55 oz.



32 H2.5 732 H2.5 .32 H&R Magnum $599
32 VH4 732 VH4 .32 H&R Magnum $619
32 VH6 732 VH6 .32 H&R Magnum $659
32 VH8 732 VH8 .32 H&R Magnum $699
32 VH10 732 VH10 .32 H&R Magnum $729
3220 H2.5 73220 H2.5 .32-20 $599
3220 VH4 73220 VH4 .32-20 $619
3220 VH6 73220 VH6 .32-20 $659
3220 VH8 73220 VH8 .32-20 $699
3220 VH10 73220 VH10 .32-20 $729"
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
william iorg,

Since my expertise with the 32Mag is limited to an afternoon, really appreciate hearing from a 32Mag fan with experience. I've thunk and thunk about this "which cartridge" situation and have decided to start my search for a 32Mag revolver. If I can't find one, I can always ask Mr. Bowen to upgrade a Single Six I have.

And you answered a question I hadn't gotten around to checking out....the availablity of brass. And you're certainly correct in suggesting Starline deserves credit for their support/supply of hard to find brass.

Thanks again, and let us know if you think of any other insights on the 32Mag..

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
William,

That's pretty disappointing to hear about the cylinders. I've only had time to search several sites and only find fixed sights Rugers so far -- and I need adjustable sights. I had checked S&W's web site, but they only list 1 7/8" barrel revolvers and that's too short. We shorties have to stick together, but 1 7/8" barrel is too short for me.

I've got time, not a big rush, and we have a gun show the end of May so I'll look around then.

Thanks for the heads-up, and I'll specifically ask my sources to keep their eyes open for the S&W model.

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #21 ·
Marshall,

Ignorance on my part (but I do it so well&#33<!--emo&;)--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=';)'><!--endemo-->, didn't realize Ruger made a double action 32Mag..

Sure enough, ye ole Ruger web site shows the SP101 model KSP-3241X .32 Mag, 6 Rnds., Adj. Full Sights, 4" barrel, 33 oz at 482.00 retail. My functional usage would be slightly different as I fill out my jeans such that a holster will be required.

I've upped my search level from "looking for a bargin" to "gotta have one".

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
Marshall,

I ordered the Ruger yesterday, but that's not a problem because we (the boss and I) have an agreement called "matching funds". It's also called
"join bank account". I buy a new, indispensable tool and she gets a new chair ($756 just last week) and now we need the matching leather sofa. The sofa replaces a two year old one that has evolved from "isn't it beautiful" to "I can't stand looking at it another minute" in just two years!

The actual problem she has that I can "kinda" agree with is buying a new gun and then sending it to the gunsmith for double what I paid for the new gun. But since I'm deaf, all the muttering isn't all that bad. And we eat out all the time, so she lost that leverage. And I don't mind the new sofa so I have a nice place for the dog and I to sleep.

Dan "and that's the truth" K.
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #26 ·
Scott,

Unfortunately not yet. I expect it sometime next week. I'm ready and waiting with loads already to go.  Over the last few years, I've migrated from the longer barrels, 7 1/2 min. to the shorter barrels. I very seldom trade a gun in, but just traded a Super Redhawk 9 1/2" barrel --- just too big and clumsy. I used to be leery of the shorter barrel (4 to 5") accuracy, but that hasn't been true in the last two guns I've purchased. The 4 5/8" Blackhawk and 5" Model 29 shoot as well as any of my longer barrel revolvers.

Anyway, I hope this new one does as well.

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #28 ·
Well, heck, I was half way to the gun shop to take you up on your self-sacrificing gesture when it dawned on me why it wouldn't be fair to you, would result in a poor testing conclusion, not to mention the threat to society.

There's no way your wife would believe you didn't buy those revolvers, and would search the dresser drawers, the dirty laundry, all those "developed over the years" hiding places, putting undue stress and pressure on you which in turn would result in poor test results. You'd develop an eye twitch, a flinch, and other ailments trying to shoot while looking over shoulder, waiting for the other foot to fall. In an act of desperation, you'd sue me for alienation of affection and then my wife would get involved. I'm losing sleep just thinking about the directions this could go. You're not out in the wilderness, protecting us for the wild beasts, the bear population gets out of control and garbage cans are mutilated, unspeakable residue (yes, that's what I meant) is left in people's yards and pretty soon civilization as we know it is jeopardized. Just too risky, it could ruin your life and impact future lower 48 and Alaska relations. Can’t have that on my conscience, but I do have a better offer. I just finished a book I recently ordered and no longer have any use for it, “Forty Years with the .45-70” (Revised) by Paul A. Matthews.  If you’ll email me your address, I’ll send it instead and life here in Smallville will go on undisturbed.

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 ·
Well, apparently all that clean living is paying off? I've no doubt that you'll be very pleased. Please keep us informed of your experience(s).

One of the advertised advantages of this caliber is it's flat trajectory which gives it the potential for 100yd. targets. Are you considering any optics to take advantage of that capability?

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #34 ·
Sounds like the correct thing to do. And I think you'll find that the magnum loads will still be close to zero recoil. If memory serves me, many of the recommended magnum loads used H110 with excellent results.

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #36 ·
5:00 is early anywhere! I wouldn't mention what time we retired folks get up. I'm going over to an indoor driving range (electronically gives speed, distance, angle, etc.) to test nine different golf balls (there must be one that will help my game!) and had to get up early to make it there by 9:00.

The Ruger is a very good combination of accurate and convenient to carry/handle. I've found the 10 to 10.5 gr. to be my best performers. I continue to find it very enjoyable to shoot and have kinda put the .38/357s away.

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #39 ·
EEA,

Excellent input and information, and we all appreciate the help on this category that appears to be frequently overlooked. Could you comment a little more on the reason(s) you prefer the 32-20 over the 32 mag.?

Again, excellent post.

Dan
 

· "Bad Joke Friday" Dan (moderator emeritus)
Joined
·
7,856 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
EEA,


Articulate and interesting comments, appreciate it. Hope you'll continue to communicate on whatever subjects strikes your fancy (well, maybe I'd better be a little careful)....most anything that strikes your fancy
:)

Dan
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top