The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Breitling Watch Information Forums, Navitimer, Chronomat
 
It is currently Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:15 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2016 1:39 pm 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 12655
Likes: 115 posts
Liked in: 423 posts
Location: UK
Short version -

I tried on a Seadweller 4000 today, expecting it to be my perfect Rolex, being as it's in between the Sub and the Deepsea. But no, Rolex have screwed it up. :roll:

Longer version -

I've been into "prestige" watches for around 25 years now, and I've been fortunate to own quite a number of watches by quite a number of different brands over that time. However, over the years I've really honed my idea of what makes a watch perfect for me.... and while it may seem incredibly picky to some, the ever increasing price of watches has made me all the more careful about what I buy these days. I don't want to be flipping watches any more, so it's pretty important that what I buy is exactly what I want. In the past I've been guilty of buying certain watches that were very much "of the moment" and as a result I've frankly grown out of them. As a result I've recently sold off essentially all my watches (including all 4 of my remaining Breitlings :shock: ), and I'm now looking to buy a much smaller number (3, maybe 4 in total), that match exactly what I'm looking for.

So armed with a decent amount of cash (as a result of selling off my previous collection) and 25 years of watch-buying knowledge, you'd think it would be pretty easy to find 3 or 4 pieces that fall into my definition of perfection, right? WRONG! I've been looking for a while now, and I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that no watch-maker is capable of making a perfect watch. (Well, “not capable" is wrong - most of the big name brands certainly COULD make the perfect watch for me, but for some reason they just aren't!)

So for example, after personally having owned a Rolex Submariner 50th Anniversary LV (garbage hollow bracelet links, and tin-foil clasp), and a Deepsea (proportionally all wrong, and on a waaaay too narrow bracelet IMO), I really would like to own a non-Deepsea Rolex diver again, especially now they all have ceramic bezels and quality bracelets/clasps. So, after trying one on, I can safely say that the current Submariner is a decent enough size on my wrist (even at just 40mm) on account of the Supercase dimensions, but compared to the Deepsea it just lacks a little bit of presence (fairly obviously!), plus I don't love the cyclops, and (also fairly obviously) the Submariner is a very "me too" kind of watch that isn't an overly original choice. So you'd think that the Seadweller 4000 would be the ideal choice, being as it's a real collector's watch, much rarer, and sitting as it does right between the Sub and the Deepsea. Errrrr..... no. For some BIZARRE reason, Rolex have made the SD4K exactly the same diameter as the Sub, but they've REDUCED the Supercase dimensions at the lugs and the crown-guards!?! The result is that the SD4K actually wears much SMALLER than the Sub despite being slightly taller!??! :x Why the hell did they do that???? It makes absolutely ZERO sense to make it wear SMALLER than the Sub! :huh I don't think I've ever been as disappointed trying on a watch as I was today when I found how small it wears. :x

If Rolex had made the SD4K 42mm it would've fitted PERFECTLY between the Sub and the Deepsea in all respects - from size to depth rating. I actually even tried on an Explorer II just to test the size as that comes in at 42mm and guess what... it fitted me perfectly - but sadly I don't really like the Explorer II so that one is out. Even if they'd just kept the Supercase lugs and crown guards on the 40mm case, I would've bought the SD4K today. Yep, Rolex would have 6,900 of my hard-earn pounds in their bank account right now. But no, they had to screw up what could've been my perfect Rolex. :evil:

As you can tell I'm really gutted about the SD4K. So...sorry Rolex, no sale.... yet again!

The hunt goes on! :P

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2016 6:03 pm 
Offline
Forum Sponsor
Forum Sponsor
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:10 am
Posts: 3576
Likes: 14 posts
Liked in: 285 posts
Location: Wisconsin
I really wanted to like the SD4K as well but I wasn't a big fan of the matte dial.

_________________
Justin
Please contact me via PM for the contact details for Govberg Jewelers
Govberg is an AD for over 50 fine Swiss and German watch brands.
Visit them on the web at http://www.govbergwatches.com or call 800-528-8463


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 4:58 am 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 12655
Likes: 115 posts
Liked in: 423 posts
Location: UK
jnelson3097 wrote:
I really wanted to like the SD4K as well but I wasn't a big fan of the matte dial.

Funnily enough, the matte dial didn't bother me at all (and I thought it would before I saw it) : but then maybe I was just too irritated by how small it wore to notice!

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:07 am 
Offline
Breitling Maniac
Breitling Maniac
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:30 pm
Posts: 1483
Likes: 82 posts
Liked in: 52 posts
Location: Minnesota, USA
The good news is you have some cash locked and loaded ready to go when you find the 'perfect' piece.

No secret here I'm not a big Rolex fan because of some of the reasons you mentioned, size, narrow bracelet, never liked the cyclops (just ruins a nice crystal), and my own pet peeves the case design, hand design and circular hour markers (doesn't leave much left, ha) With that said, the Sea Dweller is the only one I would even consider, but still not for me.

Too follow up on the subject of price, things have gotten way out of control even if there is a few added technical features. Most of them aren't necessary, still not a guy who NEEDS an in-house movement. I'm still in the flipping mode so haven't found that 'perfect' piece either!

Good luck with the hunt, :) .

_________________
Chronospace EVO Night Mission



Driver8 likes this post.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 8:22 am 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 12655
Likes: 115 posts
Liked in: 423 posts
Location: UK
Kodiak wrote:
The good news is you have some cash locked and loaded ready to go when you find the 'perfect' piece.

No secret here I'm not a big Rolex fan because of some of the reasons you mentioned, size, narrow bracelet, never liked the cyclops (just ruins a nice crystal), and my own pet peeves the case design, hand design and circular hour markers (doesn't leave much left, ha) With that said, the Sea Dweller is the only one I would even consider, but still not for me.

Too follow up on the subject of price, things have gotten way out of control even if there is a few added technical features. Most of them aren't necessary, still not a guy who NEEDS an in-house movement. I'm still in the flipping mode so haven't found that 'perfect' piece either!

Good luck with the hunt, :) .

Yes it's no secret here that I'm far from a Rolex "fan-boy" myself, and that's despite having owned two Rolies in the past. Their slowness to innovate, their complete reluctance to increase the size of their dive watches past 40mm (Deepsea aside), and their totally artificial restriction on supply (in spite of producing a truly vast number of watches per year) irritates me beyond words. BUT I also have to admit they certainly know how to produce a very well finished, quality, and most importantly, a timeless product, and for that reason alone I would like to pick one up again.

I'm thinking now that a Sub "no-date" may be the way forward : genuine Supercase (not the neutered SD4K case), plus the super-clean, classic, and ultimately "pure" no-date dial....and therefore no Cyclops. :thumbsup: I feel another AD trip coming on.......

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 10:12 am 
Offline
Breitling Maniac
Breitling Maniac
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:30 pm
Posts: 1483
Likes: 82 posts
Liked in: 52 posts
Location: Minnesota, USA
Driver8 wrote:
Kodiak wrote:
The good news is you have some cash locked and loaded ready to go when you find the 'perfect' piece.

No secret here I'm not a big Rolex fan because of some of the reasons you mentioned, size, narrow bracelet, never liked the cyclops (just ruins a nice crystal), and my own pet peeves the case design, hand design and circular hour markers (doesn't leave much left, ha) With that said, the Sea Dweller is the only one I would even consider, but still not for me.

Too follow up on the subject of price, things have gotten way out of control even if there is a few added technical features. Most of them aren't necessary, still not a guy who NEEDS an in-house movement. I'm still in the flipping mode so haven't found that 'perfect' piece either!

Good luck with the hunt, :) .

Yes it's no secret here that I'm far from a Rolex "fan-boy" myself, and that's despite having owned two Rolies in the past. Their slowness to innovate, their complete reluctance to increase the size of their dive watches past 40mm (Deepsea aside), and their totally artificial restriction on supply (in spite of producing a truly vast number of watches per year) irritates me beyond words. BUT I also have to admit they certainly know how to produce a very well finished, quality, and most importantly, a timeless product, and for that reason alone I would like to pick one up again.

I'm thinking now that a Sub "no-date" may be the way forward : genuine Supercase (not the neutered SD4K case), plus the super-clean, classic, and ultimately "pure" no-date dial....and therefore no Cyclops. :thumbsup: I feel another AD trip coming on.......


Don't spend much time looking at them these days. Is the newer SD4K case different than the earlier/discontinued SD case? And what is this size (neutered) difference between SD4K and Sub case?

_________________
Chronospace EVO Night Mission


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 11:49 am 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 12655
Likes: 115 posts
Liked in: 423 posts
Location: UK
Yes the SD4K case is slightly more "chunky" than the old SD case, but less chunky than the current Sub. (That's what I mean by saying it's more of a "neutered" Supercase). This makes the SD4K wear SMALLER than the Sub which is frankly ridiculous IMO as it should be in between the Sub and the DS.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 9:25 am 
Offline
Breitling Enthusiast
Breitling Enthusiast

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 6:04 am
Posts: 32
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 3 posts
Even though I have essentially "lurked" on this forum for years, this topic has finally compelled an actual written response. :) In some respects, watch collecting would be easier if Rolex didn't exist. It is always the elephant in the room. Despite being produced in mass quantities, the relatively high second hand prices seem to almost deplete the values of other comparable brands, Breitling included.

As a WIS, the Rolex brand appeals to me for its history, robustness, and general appearance, yet it is always the case that I seem to be appreciating them on other people, not myself. I have owned, and sold, an Explorer II and a Milgauss. Since then I have purchased a Chronomat 44 and think it is a better designed, superior piece, with fantastic wrist presence and accuracy. I don't take anything away from Rolex in general, obviously, but the legend of the brand sometimes is not met by the product itself.

As for the SD 4k, I had the same reaction. The size was insanely frustrating. The Sub looked better but it just seemed like such a default choice and I could not bring myself to purchase one. That said, it is classic, but as you said, a rather staid and safe choice.

I am also always searching for perfect watches. On this account, let me say that Breitling, despite its detractors, has a ton to recommend it. I don't know which 4 you have sold, but I would recommend looking at the Chronomat line (again). Also I think the BP FF Bathyscape is a great, and much less obvious, alternative to the Sub. I also think that the DJ II with the fluted bezel is a standout among modern Rolex.



2 people like this post.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 2:34 pm 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 12655
Likes: 115 posts
Liked in: 423 posts
Location: UK
danschnapp wrote:
I am also always searching for perfect watches. On this account, let me say that Breitling, despite its detractors, has a ton to recommend it. I don't know which 4 you have sold, but I would recommend looking at the Chronomat line (again). Also I think the BP FF Bathyscape is a great, and much less obvious, alternative to the Sub.

Hi danschnapp - thanks for the post. The four I sold (Navi World, Super Avenger, Bentley Motors, Bentley 6.75) were great watches for me when I bought them, but (with the exception of the Navi World) my tastes have just changed a little over the years, plus I've turned into something of a movement snob, so in-house is the only way I go now. :oops:

I really want to like the current Chronomat, and I HAVE warmed to it quite a bit over the years, but unfortunately I still struggle with the bezel font, plus I'm not really a fan of 4:30 dates (although it's kind of understandable on a tricompax chrono like the B01). However a 4:30 date on a 3 hand movement is a terrible look IMO, and that totally kills the FF Bathyscaphe for me too unfortunately. :(

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:17 pm 
Offline
Breitling Connoisseur
Breitling Connoisseur

Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:09 pm
Posts: 557
Likes: 10 posts
Liked in: 72 posts
danschnapp wrote:
Even though I have essentially "lurked" on this forum for years, this topic has finally compelled an actual written response. :) In some respects, watch collecting would be easier if Rolex didn't exist. It is always the elephant in the room. Despite being produced in mass quantities, the relatively high second hand prices seem to almost deplete the values of other comparable brands, Breitling included.

As a WIS, the Rolex brand appeals to me for its history, robustness, and general appearance, yet it is always the case that I seem to be appreciating them on other people, not myself. I have owned, and sold, an Explorer II and a Milgauss. Since then I have purchased a Chronomat 44 and think it is a better designed, superior piece, with fantastic wrist presence and accuracy. I don't take anything away from Rolex in general, obviously, but the legend of the brand sometimes is not met by the product itself.

As for the SD 4k, I had the same reaction. The size was insanely frustrating. The Sub looked better but it just seemed like such a default choice and I could not bring myself to purchase one. That said, it is classic, but as you said, a rather staid and safe choice.

I am also always searching for perfect watches. On this account, let me say that Breitling, despite its detractors, has a ton to recommend it. I don't know which 4 you have sold, but I would recommend looking at the Chronomat line (again). Also I think the BP FF Bathyscape is a great, and much less obvious, alternative to the Sub. I also think that the DJ II with the fluted bezel is a standout among modern Rolex.


Somehow you have more or less transformed my thoughts into words. When I first bought my Chronomat, it was because I love the color combo, the Breitling logo, and the design in general. In fact I chose it over the GMT II C back then after months of careful consideration and reading all the reviews. The only reason why I was considering the GMT II C was simply because it was Rolex and the mass view seemed to attempt and manipulate my thoughts. It was my first luxury watch but within a year came the batman. That blue on the bezel impressed me and the batman became my 2nd luxury watch. Despite being the more recent watch my Chronomat was still capturing majority of my wrist time. Slowly I began to realize that my love for the Chronomat was not diminishing, but getting stronger overtime, as I kept discovering new details on the design that I did not realize in the past. I began to realize that there was nothing that I was unhappy about my Chronomat in terms of design and function and that it had been the perfect watch for me all along. In fact I was impressed by all the details and feel that the essence of this model cannot do without any of them.

A Rolex is like a benchmark among many where it seems the ultimate choice in terms of a timeless, classic, robust, versatile and valued timepiece. Owning a Rolex allows me to compare and know where my Breitling stands vs the "benchmark", in my eyes. Till date I am personally convinced that both are competitive in terms of durability and accuracy, even though my Breitlings gain lesser time than my Rolex many a time. Rolex really seems a default choice as you can't really find fault with most of the pieces. However there is nothing exciting or unique that sets it apart from the rest, except the fact that it's a Rolex. I guess that's the trade off for a "default" piece. Timeless but generic looking. I guess that was why I bought the Batman, slightly unique with a new innovation and color combo. However I seem to get tired of it quickly, and it doesn't really excite me wearing it. I still love it very much, but a "generic" piece like that can never qualify as my perfect timepiece. However it's my runner up closely behind my Chronomat, before my Navi. I don't know why Navi is the last on my ranking list despite it being the most recent watch I had gotten. I love it, but perhaps I feel that it's not as versatile as my other 2.

While many shuns Breitling because of its more obvious cosmetic changes on many of its models regularly, I began to appreciate that. Imagine yourself buying a sub in the older days and you thought it's the perfect watch for you. Then came a new sub with that ceramic bezel. Same look but much better made. So is that sub still your perfect watch? For the Chronomat Evo owners, when the B01 was launched, many Evo owners were still happy, because they preferred the old bezel and the 6,9,12 sub-dials layout. Still the same Chronomat with the essential elements like the onion crown, the raised rider tabs, etc, but own unique identity. After all since I have to spend a ton for my perfect watch I would want it to have its own unique identity without losing the essence of the model line. Breitling can potentially offer that perfect watch to many individuals IMHO.

I am glad that I have found my perfect watch right from the start. Actually the more experienced WIS like Driver8, the more difficult it is for them to find the perfect watch they want. My suggestion for is not to seek the perfect design that you are looking for, but instead appreciate the designs from the company's/designer's perspective, and see which works best for you. For example, I actually prefer the Sub over the GMT, due to higher WR and the timer bezel is more useful for me. However I love the dual color on the GMT bezel and wish that Rolex could use adopt a dual color on the sub bezel, which would have been the best of both worlds, better functionality for my needs and more aesthetically pleasing. However I know it will never happen because of Rolex's reason of adopting a dual color on the GMT bezel, which would not make rational sense if adopted on the Sub. Therefore I appreciated the intention behind the designs and ended up more impressed with Rolex's idea of adopting dual color to differentiate day and night on the GMT. I could do with just 100 WR and the bezel, although not that useful for me, has better presence aesthically because of the numerals. So I decided that GMT was the Rolex for me. Sometimes we just cannot have the best of everything because if so the whole thing might end up not making sense at all and you can end up having a horrible piece. If there is anything about a Rolex design that is polarizing, it has to be that cyclops lens. However that is one main element that made me get a Rolex. It does kill the neat layout on and beneath that sapphire crystal, and seriously you don't need a magnifier to see the date. However that's one main element that adds more identity to the Rolex piece IMHO and without it the whole piece will look more generic.

Just my thoughts....

_________________
Breitling Chronomat 01 Limited Edition
Breitling Navitimer 01 46mm
Rolex Yacht Master 268622


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 6:04 am 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 12655
Likes: 115 posts
Liked in: 423 posts
Location: UK
I agree with a lot of your points there, Chronomat01LE.

I think for me the "problem" is that us WIS-folk tend to MASSIVELY over-scrutinize things! (And I'm talking entirely about myself here! :lol: )

Many non-WIS people will just buy a watch because they kind of like it on the day they're in the shop, or they want a well known brand name on their wrist to somehow validate the expenditure. This is why Rolex (while also being beloved by many WIS for many good reasons) is so often the default choice for non-watch people with a bit of cash to spend on a watch. Those type of people don't spend hours poring over websites and catalogues, or any time on fora like this, and as a result they are more easily pleased. And I don't mean that in a derogatory way : it's just that a line-of-text-extra-on-a-dial here, or a slightly-short-minute-hand there, doesn't affect their watch purchase at all....because they don't see it as a problem. The watch just is what it is for them.

The "problem" comes when you are really immersed in a topic, and you start to see things you really like on one watch, and something else you really like on another one.....and over time you start wishing that all the elements you like could just come together in a "perfect storm" in one watch. And unless you get very VERY lucky, that just won't happen. (Or unless you go and make your own of course!)

That's where the lack of an additional 2mm on the SD case-size (or the lack of supercase lugs) makes all the difference to me buying it, or not buying it. Yes they're tiny margins, but margins that make all the difference IMO.

The only watch I've ever found that is 99.9% "just right" in my eyes is the Panerai 233. The 0.1% difference is due to the fact that I'd prefer it to be an auto just for the sake of convenience, but that would make it as thick as a 270....and I can live with the manual wind on this one as it's an 8 dayer, plus manual winding is traditional for Panerai anyway. (I just need to find one at a decent price!)

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator
Image



TheGanzman likes this post.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:28 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member

Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:47 am
Posts: 1222
Likes: 8 posts
Liked in: 58 posts
Location: UK
I have been through *exactly* the odyssey you describe Driver, in regard to the SD4000. I too thought it was the perfect solution - Sub too common, DSSD just daft [and I have modest wrists]. But its dimensions are wrong and being thicker it's top-heavy and just doesn't sit as well as on the wrist, mine anyway. I've ended up deciding to get the 16040M, ie the previous iteration of no-date Sub.

In that vein, have you considered the previous SD, the 16600? It has something of a rep as the connoisseur's Rolie, eg

http://www.fratellowatches.com/grab-the ... e-you-can/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 2:54 pm 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 12655
Likes: 115 posts
Liked in: 423 posts
Location: UK
TomP wrote:
I have been through *exactly* the odyssey you describe Driver, in regard to the SD4000. I too thought it was the perfect solution - Sub too common, DSSD just daft [and I have modest wrists]. But its dimensions are wrong and being thicker it's top-heavy and just doesn't sit as well as on the wrist, mine anyway. I've ended up deciding to get the 16040M, ie the previous iteration of no-date Sub.

In that vein, have you considered the previous SD, the 16600? It has something of a rep as the connoisseur's Rolie, eg

http://www.fratellowatches.com/grab-the ... e-you-can/

Thanks for the recommendation Tom as it is an undoubted classic, but unfortunately I really like the ceramic bezel, newer clasp and bracelet, and the supercase dimensions of the 116610 and 116040. :? I'm going to try a 116040 as soon as I can find one at a local AD. Fingers crossed!

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 7:27 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member

Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:47 am
Posts: 1222
Likes: 8 posts
Liked in: 58 posts
Location: UK
I'll follow this with interest. I'm neutral on the ceramic but it is true that everyone raves about the new bracelet. I have the old Oyster on my disco/d Explorer II 61570 - the hollow "tin-foil" Oyster - and despite the insubstantial impression it does give compared to more modern, heavier bracelets, I must say I love it: I find that since it's lighter it's more comfortable, and moves around less.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 4:21 pm 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 12655
Likes: 115 posts
Liked in: 423 posts
Location: UK
TomP wrote:
I'll follow this with interest. I'm neutral on the ceramic but it is true that everyone raves about the new bracelet. I have the old Oyster on my disco/d Explorer II 61570 - the hollow "tin-foil" Oyster - and despite the insubstantial impression it does give compared to more modern, heavier bracelets, I must say I love it: I find that since it's lighter it's more comfortable, and moves around less.

I used to have a 50th Anniversary LV, and while I personally thought the hollow link bracelet and pressed metal clasp weren't remotely up to modern standards, the funny thing is I don't think I've EVER come across a report of either component failing.

As a related aside, I was in a diving museum recently that's staffed entirely by ex-military and ex-commercial saturation divers, and one of the guys I was chatting to (a 30 year saturation dive veteran) was wearing a 35 year old Seadweller. It was actually a very rare watch with a very interesting story attached to it, but what amazed me was that after 35 years (with 30 of them spent at the bottom of the North Sea, as he actually used it for what it was intended) it still looked in amazing condition and had never once suffered a failure. Great testament to the engineering...........even if it's not up to current build levels.

Anyway, here's a quick pic of my old LV -

Image

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests


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 post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
 


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group