|
Thread Number: 37388
Why are Top Loaders Cheaper than Front Loaders? |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 555888 , Reply# 1 11/11/2011 at 08:26 (4,400 days old) by DirectDriveDave () | ||
|
I'm thinking it's because when you open up a basic TL, it is much simpler inside, like the inside of a WP direct drive or any of the Maytag TL washers. Less was required to build them. This is all just a guess. | ||
| Post# 555894 , Reply# 2 11/11/2011 at 09:40 (4,400 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
well for me in my case a top load washer is easyer for me to load and unload when it comes to washing clothes and there is also the fact that topload washers are easyer to start set the dial to the desired wash time pull the timer knob and voila and the wash time of a top loader is shorter than the wash time on a fl and the model in the picture when my duet set breaks will be the model that i will buy as a daily driver as well.
| ||
| Post# 555904 , Reply# 3 11/11/2011 at 10:23 (4,400 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
Also what influce the price is the cycles or option featured
this all depends on the cycles or options offered on a washer thake as an exemple this topload maytag bravo washer, and here are the options and cycles it offers but for me in my case i do not see the use of a sanitize cycle.
Dependable Performance Capacity: 4.5 cu. ft. I.E.C.* Smooth Balance™ Suspension System with Superior Vibration Control (SVC) PowerWash™ Cycle Sensi-Care™ Wash System with IntelliClean™ impeller QuietSeries™ 300 sound package Add a Garment Indicator Extra Rinse option Whites Cycle Cycles: 13 Auto Start-Up Electronic Controls Dependable Performance Maytag® Commercial Technology (MCT) Every Maytag® washer features long-lasting, commercial-grade components for your home. MCT components found in Bravos® washers include the wash basket, drive system bearings and motor capacity. These durable components assure a long and dependable life for the product. Smooth Balance™ Suspension System with Superior Vibration Control (SVC) A reliable magnetic direct drive system, dual balance rings, four spring dampers and advanced balancing software—these washers operate smoothly. Vibration is minimized, making it ideal for upper-floor installation. Power Wash Cycle Extra cleaning action and a deep rinse tackles your dirtiest loads Dependable Design 4.5 cu. ft. I.E.C.* Capacity Easily handles large loads—With an unsurpassed 4.5 cu. ft. I.E.C.* capacity, this Bravos® washer is our largest washer ever. Dependable Efficiency ENERGY STAR® Qualified Our most efficient top-load washers. They use 70% less water and 67% less energy than conventional top-loading washers.(*may depend on the area you are as each have diffrents water norme) *Equivalent volume per I.E.C. International Standard, 4th Ed., based on 4.0 cu. ft. DOE measurement. Dependable Durability 10-Year Limited Warranty on wash basket and motor Maytag Commercial Technology (MCT) Wide Opening Lid with SmoothClose™ Hinge Stainless Steel wash basket Commercial capacity, direct-drive infinite speed motor Zinc-coated, tuned leveling legs Commercial-grade glass window Dependable Efficiency ENERGY STAR® Qualified MaxExtract™ Extended Spin Option Automatic detergent, bleach and fabric softener dispensers *Equivalent volume per I.E.C. International Standard, 4th Ed., based on 4.0 cu. ft. DOE measurement. but me in my case i am sticking to a classic top load washer with agitator like the inglis washer pictures in my last post. 
| ||
| Post# 555915 , Reply# 4 11/11/2011 at 11:41 (4,400 days old) by laundromat (Hilo, Hawaii) | ||
I think that there are many reasons for the front loaders being a bit more including the cost of retooling the many factories and assembly lines used to manufacture them. Remember, front loaders were not that popular in the U.S. due to companies like P&G trying to brainwash all of us that suds get your clothes clean. their marketing proved that when their ads for products like Tide advertised saying "Oceans of suds" on their packages.Suds in front loaders retard (slow down) the washing process (tumbling) and can break the washers.So, by the 1960's,early 1970's,Westinghouse was the only brand of front loading washers available in the U.S. however, there were many more being made overseas and they were the most popular style in Europe, Asia, and the far east.because of that, most of the "bugs" they had were fixed and many companies there gained sales as well as popularity.Because of that and WCI being dethroned by Electrolux who built a brand new factory in '95 solely for their new front loaders,the competitors also retooled their lines bringing their own version out. I predicted this way back in the early 80's. I think john and Tom remember me talking about it back then. I actually had written a long letter to Frigidaire telling them to reintroduce the front loaders Westinghouse made. Six years later, the new ones arrived and the rest is all history. The companies like Whirlpool, Maytag and GE had to retool or open new factories to meet the demand and now they all have their own versions of their new products.They used that to increase the profit claiming it was more expensive to make them.I don't see how a machine with fewer parts, no transmission and cheaper,plastic parts can be justifiably more expensive to make.
I,myself, have noticed just recently that U.S. detergents like Tide, Gain, and Wisk that are not HE don't make half the bubbles or suds they did a year ago. I wonder if anyone here has noticed that. I deliberately poured 2 measuring cups of Tide with Bleach in my Miele and got almost no suds.has P&G finally given up on high sudzing detergents? Lets only hope. | ||
| Post# 555937 , Reply# 6 11/11/2011 at 14:01 (4,399 days old) by hoover1100 (U.K.) | ||
|
Why are Top Loaders Cheaper than Front Loaders? 'cos front loaders are better? *ducks and runs!* | ||
Post# 555939 , Reply# 7 11/11/2011 at 14:37 (4,399 days old) by Launderess  (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
Historically H-Axis Washers Have Always Cost More 
Than top loading versions.
The R&D that goes into designing a water tight system that not only can keep the water and clothing inside a horizontal drum, then various safety,protection, stablisation systems and so forth. Even with say only 11lbs of dry laundry once wet you've got quite potential mass there suspended on that central bearing and the machine must last severaldaily duty cycles over a decent amount of time (in theory) to give customer satisfaction. Top loading washers basically have a tub and central beater.Aside from the seals neath the agitator to keep water from leaking you have a pretty basic machine. Will give you as designs settled into customer demand Europe went one way and the USA another. So after awhile since manufacturers on each side of the pond were by and large producing only one type of machine, economies of scale took over. Expensive as some think domestic front loaders are, price even the smallest commercial/laundromat unit, they are *quite* dear. However such machines are designed to withstand heavy use/abuse and can be totally serviced including torn down and rebuilt. | ||
|
Post# 555940 , Reply# 8 11/11/2011 at 14:41 (4,399 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
And Another Thing
For at least American washer makers there were few ways of designing early front loader that got around Bendix's patents. Appliance makers must have figured "why bother" with all that extra costs and put their R&D into taking top loading washers to new heights.
From the simple wringer washers the USA saw a huge variety of top loading washers including "odd" designs such as the Frigidare "Jet Action" thumpers to the wiggle disk of Philco-Bendix | ||
| Post# 555942 , Reply# 9 11/11/2011 at 14:55 (4,399 days old) by arbilab (Ft Worth TX (Ridglea)) | ||
I could have got a near-TOL TL and new dryer for what I paid for a BOL FL. Neptune was even more, more troublesome, and my FL policy is "no window, no sale".
Even when Westinghouse FLs had a transmission they were no more expensive than a GE TL and cheaper IINM than a Frigidaire TL. FL suspensions are a little more complex but suspension is only one system, doesn't justify doubling the price of the product. Other than that, both have motors, pumps, valves, controls (electronic or clockwork), cabinets, bearings, tubs. So why ARE FLs more expensive? Because they can be? AKA, "market forces"? | ||
| Post# 555952 , Reply# 10 11/11/2011 at 15:22 (4,399 days old) by brummybear (Birmingham uk) | ||
UK and US cost of front loders and top loders | ||
| Post# 556016 , Reply# 11 11/11/2011 at 20:56 (4,399 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
for anyone s' infos a top load cleans better than a fron
for one thing a top load washer wash better than a front load washer since for one thing the clothes are submerge in water and agitated with sends the detergent in the fiber of the clothes i am going off topic for a sec but i have a 95 year old aunt in my family that has a top load washer this model to be precise brand inglis liberator and she knows nothing of electronics or computer so trying to teach her on using a front load washer or one of these newer top load washers with electronic controls she would not even understand since she knows nothing of computers well back to the topic at hand me i know for 1 thing is when my actual set breaks i will be buying as a daily driver the model i pictured in my Post# 555894, Reply# 2 with the matching dryer and do not forget that the choice of a washer depends on the person using it and for my family i am the 1 doing the washing.
| ||
| Post# 556046 , Reply# 12 11/11/2011 at 23:28 (4,399 days old) by qualin (Canada) | ||
|
Thanks for the input everyone. I've had my questions answered. | ||
| Post# 556071 , Reply# 13 11/12/2011 at 04:22 (4,399 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
Still in time to have my say?
Hi qualin...
I know you had your question answered, I hope I'm still allowed to put in my 5p worth. Apart from all the other potential reasons already mentioned on this thread, marketing, existence of suspension system, etc, my contribution to this is about the involvement of more labour required to build a front loader and the need for more advanced engineering in order to achieve gravity management. Immagine what would happen if you decided to lean your top loader on its side and let it operate against gravity. Hence stronger supporting system for a heavy laod of wet clothes being lifted and dropped in a tumble fashion. To get an idea of how sturdy a front load structure must be, try to spin the drum by hand with a full load of soaked clothes (If you have a front loader) and see how heavy this is... that's how hard your front loader works... and it does it for hours! Enough from me... see ya ;-) | ||
| Post# 556234 , Reply# 15 11/13/2011 at 04:47 (4,398 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
|
Thanx Qualin!
I'm happy you're answered, you made my comment fit in with the rest ;-)
I'm not up on HP in relation to electric motors... but I guess '1' means higher power compared to 1/3? Yet, I can think of good reasons for putting a powerful motor in a TL too... immagine those users who overload them (although it's a no no), they're still going to need some good power to move the agitator through the clothes! By contrast an overloaded FL might even require less power to turn and keep turning as the weight of the clothes is all lumped up equally... and tumble action would be very reduced: perhaps the hardest situation would be with a 3/4 drum of clothes (or less) and 1/3 drum of water as the tumble action would require quite some strength to occur (and it's the most effective cleaningwise). That's why you Americans build massive front loaders... in order to allow enough space for clothes to wash in the shortest possible time. Laters. | ||
| Post# 556564 , Reply# 17 11/14/2011 at 17:03 (4,396 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
|
I'm getting changed as I type this message :-)
I see where you're coming from in what you're saying... that would make me a true European for sure! Yes... I often find myself hopping on one leg trying to get out of my clothes while my index finger prepares to press the start button on the washer! You got it... a pair of trousers and a shirt are good enough for me to have a load!
Perhaps I can accept that as a general statement but it's not really that simple. Yes it might apply to me... but from what I've seen so far... each person around here seems to have their own laundry habits! I'm not even consistent with it myself... you might sometimes find me doing umpteen micro loads and other times, all of a sudden, stuffing the washer silly as I realize that the wash hamper got fuller than expected... ouch... heavy... help! Still, my washer wouldn't pair with an oversized American FL even when run at its fullest: naturally that means infinite wash times, which I don't personally mind cos' when I run into this kind of situation, I set the washer the night before to run a couple of hours before I get up. Having said that... I feel that the real reason for having bigger FLs in the States is due the the fact that you folks are used to the quicker wash times of a TL, so your FLs must be bigger to accomodate the same quantity of laundry and return peak results in the shortest possible time (which would still be longer compared to a TL). I am sure there are other reasons... and this is the beauty of these many cultural exchanges made possible by this forum ;-) Now I managed to derail totally: I didn't mean to sabotage this thread... too badly :-P | ||
|
Post# 556574 , Reply# 18 11/14/2011 at 17:27 (4,396 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Standard 5kg/11lb Front Load Washers
Were long seen by a majority of American consumers as "too small" for their purposes.
Malber, Miele, Bosch, Asko, Equator et al all had limited sucess selling units and none really achieved any deep market share equal to say Whirlpool or Maytag. The long cycle times plus *small* capacity simply turned Americans off. Mind you as most of us know and those Americans who tried found out you can fit quite allot into a 5kg machine, still the washers lost points. Even Consumer Reports often dinged such machines because they didn't hold as much as a top loader. European and UK housewives long ago adapted to doing the wash daily or as often as required to keep up with demand. Also the small size of 5kg washers allow for installation in kitchens and other areas. This is a boon to those living in tight quarters that often made up many UK/European homes without dedicated laundry areas. American housewives OTHO have still clung to the washdays of their grand or great grandmothers. That is the stuff is saved up for a week or so and one big wash day is set aside to get the thing out of the way. For that you need washing machines able to hold large amounts of laundry and or very quick cycles; that is right up top loader's street. This why you see all the various designs of "HE" top loading washing machines. From what one understand uber-sized front loaders do not sell well in the UK/EU, consumers don't see the need. | ||
| Post# 556733 , Reply# 19 11/15/2011 at 08:37 (4,396 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
The choices bewteen a topload washer and front load washer a
the choice between a top load washer and front load depends on the use like if i take as an exemple a family of 2 that wash every day or a family with young children that needs to wash every day or have to soak clothes over night because of stains on the clothe the choice would go for a topload washer du to the fact that the washer dial as the option depending on the model of having a 6 minutes agitation wash time on the dial or 2 or 3 minutes(Short wash) for top load washers depending on the brand of the top load washer compare this to a front load washer that has a 1:04 minutes wash time for me in my case thats way to long and why have on a washer a heavy duty cycle or whitest white cycle when the normal cycle has the same effects as these cycles? if you look closely at the picture included there are not that many cycles on the washer and it do not change anything in cleaning power of the washer.
| ||
| Post# 556773 , Reply# 20 11/15/2011 at 11:04 (4,396 days old) by iheartmaytag (Wichita, Kansas) | ||
 Here's the way it was 'splained to me: Front Loaders cost more because they have a more complex set of seals and balance system. Front Loaders cost more because American manufacturers are still re-cooping the cost of development. Front Loaders cost more because they put more bling on them to get people to pay more.
Top Loaders take less time to do a cycle, but use more water in doing so. As I was told, a FL machine takes about twice as long to do one load as a TL machine, but it holds twice as much, so in the end it's doing the same amount of clothes in the same time frame, and using less water and energy to boot.
| ||
|
Post# 556831 , Reply# 23 11/15/2011 at 15:23 (4,395 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Laundromat Front Loaders
Most brands such as SQ, Dexter, Wascomat etc start at 5kg or so but go up to 50lbs or greater.
Indeed the greatest trend in laundromat business these days are washers from 18lbs, 25lbs and those 50lb behemoths. This his happening for several reasons. One, many customers like bringing in huge loads and bunging the lot into one washer rather than run several smaller loads in different machines. This includes local businesses such as dog kennels, vet offices, dry cleaners without their own capacity of washers/dryers etc... Larger washers also allow the processing of huge bulky items like duvets, car mats, pillows and so forth by both in house wash/fold service and customers. One problem is that many laundromats often upgrade and or install uber-sized washers but fail to add dryers that can accomodate those loads. While it may not be a problem splitting up 50lbs of laundry into many dryers, duvets and other large bulky items really do need more than than the standard pocket dryers to be done properly. | ||
|
Post# 556846 , Reply# 24 11/15/2011 at 16:31 (4,395 days old) by sudsmaster (SF Bay Area, California) |
||
It's because the front loaders are made in the USA and the top loaders are made in Canada.
LOL. Seriously, the top loaders are old, proven technology. Even with the new restrictions on water use and temperature, they are still cheaper to make than most front loaders, esp the BOL ones, with plastic wash baskets and paper thin sheet metal cabinetry. To get a good wash a front loader needs to work smarter than a top loader, and this costs money for R&D and electronic controls. | ||
| Post# 556869 , Reply# 25 11/15/2011 at 18:40 (4,395 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
Top loaders are not old
Top loaders are not old tech they are a better choice compare to front load washers at least for me as a top load washer you can control the water level depending on the load and they are also low price perfect for those that can not afford to buy a fl washer and the trouble with front load washer for those that suffer from arthrits in the back or tend to have occasnal muscle pain a top load you can unload the clothe standing up and there is also no door seal to clean and here is a quote of my last post try to teach an 95 year elder thats knows nothing on how to use a computers she would not know much about a washer with electonics controls if she do not know how to use a computer since an electronic control board is like a computer.
| ||
|
Post# 556878 , Reply# 26 11/15/2011 at 19:13 (4,395 days old) by DADoES (TX, U.S. of A.) |
||
 You keep saying that about frontloaders with electronics being difficult to use, but I don't understand why. How hard is it to push a cycle selection button (or turn a dial as the case may be) and press a Start button? Majority of consumers use the cycle defaults so there's nothing else needs to be set, and all frontloaders adjust the water level automatically. My grandmother, who only made it to third grade before an evil stepfather pulled her out of school, caught on to using an electronic F&P washer with no trouble ... Press Regular (which I marked with red tape) and Start (blue button), simple as that. | ||
| Post# 556889 , Reply# 27 11/15/2011 at 20:21 (4,395 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
i am talking about someone in my family thats 95 years old and for me what i do not like about front loaders for anyone asking its the long wash time and the fact that i need to set the water temp to cold each time witch should of been the default water temp from the start and the long wash time is also a complete waste of engergy in my book.AND THEY LEAVE MY CLOTHES FULL OF WRINKLES 100% of the time witch forces me to rewash if my clothes have to much wrinkles compare to my old 1993 topload washer that i had my clothe came out wrinkle free sorry for the all caps
| ||
|
Post# 556893 , Reply# 28 11/15/2011 at 20:35 (4,395 days old) by DADoES (TX, U.S. of A.) |
||
|
| ||
| Post# 556921 , Reply# 29 11/15/2011 at 22:22 (4,395 days old) by powerfin64 (Yakima, Washington) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 556967 , Reply# 32 11/16/2011 at 07:09 (4,395 days old) by mrb627 (Buford, GA) | ||
R&D | ||
| Post# 557611 , Reply# 35 11/18/2011 at 14:46 (4,392 days old) by arbilab (Ft Worth TX (Ridglea)) | ||
|
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maybe it's the electronics? ++++++++++++++++++++++++ I've been in that business. That $150 board it costs to replace can't cost more than $20 to make. Not much design work either, the design is mostly dictated by the chipset, just copy it off the spec sheet. The only work that goes into it is hiring a programmer to write the code and it doesn't take a very advanced programmer to write washer code. These days, marketing determines what they want the machine to do, they email that to a programmer in India making 1/3 what a US engineer costs. | ||
| Post# 557950 , Reply# 36 11/20/2011 at 02:40 (4,391 days old) by qualin (Canada) | ||
|
That still kind of blows me away that washing machines need software. I mean, it is understandable, but it makes me wonder how complex the software is in modern machines. | ||
| Post# 557954 , Reply# 37 11/20/2011 at 02:54 (4,391 days old) by arbilab (Ft Worth TX (Ridglea)) | ||
|
Sequential-machine firmware is the easiest to write. I'm not even a professional coder and I can do it.
If you want your whole panel to be buttons, displays, and no clockwork, firmware is unavoidable. It's by no means necessary for laundry. Clockwork timers got clothes perfectly clean. My washer is clockwork and I have no complaints about it. Clockwork tends to be more reliable than electronics. Or at least, washers tended to be more reliable in the clockwork days than in the firmware days. Eh? But to an extent, buyers want digital displays and program buttons they don't even understand. I sure the hockeysticks can't explain that. I'm an engineer not a marketer. | ||
|
Post# 558145 , Reply# 38 11/20/2011 at 18:17 (4,390 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Every Type of Washing Machine
Has it's virtues and will produce clean and sanitised laundry if the thing is done correctly.
Whilst one adores the Miele and indeed all front loaders (built in heater preferred), there are times when one wants more control over what one is washing and or the load isn't well suited. For instance when one has large or small numbers of all the same items such as napkins, then a front loader may *not* be the best choice. A proper load for both cleaning and spin distribution in such a machine consists of a varied load. Often when doing napkins by the third or fourth rinse things end up horribly unbalanced during the following spin. Happily one has the Hoover TT and Whirlpool TL (amoung others) to get things done. For large amounts of napkins with today's modern detergents can soak them overnight and they are practically clean. Then it's off into the Hoover or Whirlpool mainly for rinsing and spinning dry. Items requiring more heavy duty cleaning can be boiled in my range top lessiveuse,followed by rinsing as above. There are also times one does not wish nor require the endless cycles and buckets of time the Miele takes to do a wash. | ||
| Post# 558220 , Reply# 39 11/21/2011 at 03:49 (4,390 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
|
If I may... I don't quite agree there :-O
@ Launderess: I found that a front loader is suitable for anything in my book.
I've washed anything possible and imaginable in my front loader of any size and shape and no once I've experienced an imbalance drama or any issues of any sort. Wash times are adjusted accordingly not just by the software but also by the intervention of the user. E.g. I'm likely to use a short cycle or options such as the 'time saver' facility if I've got a small load. I don't understand the bit about the out of balance issue... surely that becomes a real problem in a TL as the items are sitting at the bottom of a kinda turntable and the don't have a chance to reshuffle (unless you do it manually)... a FL instead has the ability to rearrange the articles as many times as necessary. Things become are little more complicated when proportions are not worked out properly, some trouble related to balance is more likely to happen within such structures which bear huge drums in confined spaces... which is increasingly the case nowadays over here too: manufacturers offering bigger capacity FLs while maintaining the same size cabinet. I guess we can generalize to an extent but it all depends on the specific machine we're dealing with no matter whether it's an FL or a TL: some machines are not as flexible as others. For example I would utterly abhor a FL which doesn't allow for some kind of leeway in wash times and temperatures... having said that, most of them do but extremely basic ones. Sorry for going off-topic again :-P Ciao | ||
|
Post# 558222 , Reply# 40 11/21/2011 at 04:31 (4,390 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
My Miele Is An Older W1070
And while "electronic" it only tries a few times to balance a load then it's off.
Washing large amounts of napkins or other items of all the same size is generally not recommended for front loaders. Things tend to ball up and or otherwise do not make for proper washing. All of our table linen is just that pure linen, some of it of the older heavy variety. Once that lot gets wet it does become quite heavy and often as stated above the washer ends up unbalanced. It will spin but shakes and vibrates. One supposes new motherboard controlled washers have ways to avoid this, but I wouldn't know about that. The Whirlpool TL is actually less sensitive to unbalanced issues especially with loads of all the same size items. Then again there is less tangling going on and the basket merely has to push items to the side as it spins. For various reasons one prefers to launder linen outside of a front loader, so don't mind using the FL or TT. Have even been known to wash my huge vintage French linen/hemp sheets in a wash tub. | ||
|
Post# 558406 , Reply# 44 11/21/2011 at 20:45 (4,389 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
All Washing Machines | ||
|
Post# 558408 , Reply# 45 11/21/2011 at 20:50 (4,389 days old) by eronie (Flushing Michigan) |
||
|
top load i can put 12 pair of farm dirty jeans in my bol ge ff and they come out clean !!! in a euro fl that would be 4 loads!! | ||
| Post# 558412 , Reply# 46 11/21/2011 at 21:19 (4,389 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
in a euro fl that would be 4 loads!!  ...only if you've a particularly big butt.
But seriously, a pair of jeans weighs somewhere between 450gm and 900gm, depending on which sex they are for and the denier of the fabric....let's say about 650gms or about 1.5lb for an average mens size 36....
In that case, my Euro front load machine with its 6.5kg capacity would only hold 10 'average' pairs - hardly small capacity.
....but a new machine of the same make would take 12.... This post was last edited 11/22/2011 at 00:18 | ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
