Jump to content

Rear Suspension And Gas


Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

 

This is my first post on this forum. I haven't attended a CSS course yet, but I'm planning for it. While I'm waiting/preparing for the course, I'm studying Twist of the Wrist II, and I just read something that sounds quite controversial to me. I'm hoping that someone can explain the physics behind how the rear end reacts to acceleration..

 

On page 14 in TOTW2, it says "Most riders don't understand this simple fact: The harder they twist the gas, the less compliant the rear suspension is and the more the rear end tries to RISE. Most riders believe that the back of the bike goes down when they accelerate. It doesn't"

 

Well at this point, I'm certainly one of "most riders", because I can't get myself to think that the rear end will actually rise when 60-100% of the weight is loaded onto the rear tire..! With cars (rear wheel drive), it's easy to see that the rear suspension is compressed as the car launches from standstill, or when the driver releases the clutch after a gear (up) change. How come this doesn't apply to bikes??

Edited by Leftlaner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Leftlaner,

 

At first glance, it is very counter-intuitive until you actually look at a chain driven motorcycle and visualize what happens to the rear suspsension when you turn the throttle.

 

I don't know if your bike is shaft or chain driven; but, if you kneel down low enough to see the chain and the swingarm from the side, you will notice the swingarm is angled downward from the pivot shaft and the upper (pulling) side of the chain is attempting to pull or rotate the swingarm downward when accelerating. Hence, the suspension tries to extend and becomes effectively stiffer under acceleration.

 

Another test you can perform with your own bike is to put the front wheel against a wall and give it some gas while letting the clutch out a bit. You may find the result interesting.

 

Check it out. Let us know what you find.

 

racer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Leftlaner,

 

At first glance, it is very counter-intuitive until you actually look at a chain driven motorcycle and visualize what happens to the rear suspsension when you turn the throttle.

 

I don't know if your bike is shaft or chain driven; but, if you kneel down low enough to see the chain and the swingarm from the side, you will notice the swingarm is angled downward from the pivot shaft and the upper (pulling) side of the chain is attempting to pull or rotate the swingarm downward when accelerating. Hence, the suspension tries to extend and becomes effectively stiffer under acceleration.

 

Another test you can perform with your own bike is to put the front wheel against a wall and give it some gas while letting the clutch out a bit. You may find the result interesting.

 

Check it out. Let us know what you find.

 

racer

 

 

Thanks for the input, racer :)

 

I ride a CBR 1100xx (chain driven), and I did actually have a look at the angle of the sidearm prior to reading this post. I have no doubts that the rear will tend to rise when putting the front wheel against a wall due to the angle of the swingarm. But won't the weight transfer front-to-rear whilst accelerating "cancel out" or even "override" this effect?

 

PS. I now realise that a bike's behaviour can't be compared to that of a car due to completely different design of the wheel suspension. A car would typically have a McPherson or double wishbone suspension, which is quite different from the standard motorbike design with it's downward angled swingarm :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input, racer :)

 

I have no doubts that the rear will tend to rise when putting the front wheel against a wall due to the angle of the swingarm. But won't the weight transfer front-to-rear whilst accelerating "cancel out" or even "override" this effect?

 

Hi Leftlaner,

 

If you think about how much power is on tap and being applied to the rear wheel/swingarm by the engine (enough to propel the total mass of the bike and rider forward with a high degree of force/acceleration approaching 1G) and then consider the amount of weight at the rear suspension is but a fraction of that, even if the suspension doesn't physically extend or become solid (like a hard tail) at lower acceleration, clearly there is enough force applied to resist compression to some degree and effectively "stiffen" the rear suspension proportional to the amount of throttle/acceleration.

 

Make sense?

 

racer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input, racer :)

 

I have no doubts that the rear will tend to rise when putting the front wheel against a wall due to the angle of the swingarm. But won't the weight transfer front-to-rear whilst accelerating "cancel out" or even "override" this effect?

 

Hi Leftlaner,

 

If you think about how much power is on tap and being applied to the rear wheel/swingarm by the engine (enough to propel the total mass of the bike and rider forward with a high degree of force/acceleration approaching 1G) and then consider the amount of weight at the rear suspension is but a fraction of that, even if the suspension doesn't physically extend or become solid (like a hard tail) at lower acceleration, clearly there is enough force applied to resist compression to some degree and effectively "stiffen" the rear suspension proportional to the amount of throttle/acceleration.

 

Make sense?

 

racer

 

That makes perfect sense to me! Allthough the rear might not actually rise much (or at all) during acceleration, I now understand that there is a force which will work "against" the weight transfer onto the rear suspension, thus reducing shock travel and increasing rear suspension "stiffness".. :) Thanks for clearing that up for me! I can hardly wait to get on with CSS level 1 course..! I have a feeling that it'll provide me with several little revelations that'll make me go "ahaaa, so THAT'S why..." :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:) Thanks for clearing that up for me!

The pleasure is all mine!

 

I can hardly wait to get on with CSS level 1 course..! I have a feeling that it'll provide me with several little revelations that'll make me go "ahaaa, so THAT'S why..." :)

Me too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
:) Thanks for clearing that up for me!

The pleasure is all mine!

 

I can hardly wait to get on with CSS level 1 course..! I have a feeling that it'll provide me with several little revelations that'll make me go "ahaaa, so THAT'S why..." :)

Me too!

 

 

If this is true (and it is, just try and do a burnout from standstill), what situations cause it to compress? On occasion coming out of the T8,9 sections of Summit Main my swingarm comes up enough that I can feel it on the bottom of my boot. Also a buddy riding behind me said he saw the rear end squat under hard acceleration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember being at the USGP a few years back, and watching Doohan come up out between turns 5 and 6, going through 2 gears. One could see the bike rise during acceleration (both front and rear) and drop when the gas was rolled off. Same is true for shaft or chain driven bikes. Keith used to have guys put their fingers between the old bikes (that had 2 shocks) so they could feel this happening.

 

C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is true (and it is, just try and do a burnout from standstill), what situations cause it to compress? On occasion coming out of the T8,9 sections of Summit Main my swingarm comes up enough that I can feel it on the bottom of my boot. Also a buddy riding behind me said he saw the rear end squat under hard acceleration.

 

T8,9 at Summit main... the double apex carousel before the short straight that leads to the last corner onto the front straight?

 

If the compression damping on a rear shock is set too low and/or rebound set too high, the shock can "pack up" in high speed sweepers. But that isn't hard acceleration. It's cornering force at high speed.

 

In any case, your "buddy" probably needs glasses. Or he didn't know what he was looking at and was watching when you rolled out in the middle of the carousel to set up for the second apex. Unless of course you weigh like four hundred pounds and your rear spring is broken and the swingarm is angled up when you merely sit on the bike. Regardless, hearsay is inadmissable in any case. Go out and watch some bikes on track and tell us how many you see squatting under acceleration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello all. It's been a while since I've been here.

I agree that the bike rises under acceleration but I don't think the chain has anything much to do with it. If you assume that the chain is trying to pull the rear axle down, then you could assume that spinning the gearbox sprocket in reverse would cause the rear axle to rise. Not gonna happen

I'd suggest that it has more to do with the angle of the swingarm to the frame i.e. it is trying to lift the frame at the swingarm pivot point.

An interesting technique used in dirtbiking is to apply the rear brake while throttling on. This allows the chain to compress the shock effectively raising the rear wheel closer to the seat, effectively lowering the rear of the bike. This allows not only better throttle control, but alters weight distribution for better traction/drive. The same could theoretically be applied to track bikes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is true (and it is, just try and do a burnout from standstill), what situations cause it to compress? On occasion coming out of the T8,9 sections of Summit Main my swingarm comes up enough that I can feel it on the bottom of my boot. Also a buddy riding behind me said he saw the rear end squat under hard acceleration.

 

T8,9 at Summit main... the double apex carousel before the short straight that leads to the last corner onto the front straight?

 

If the compression damping on a rear shock is set too low and/or rebound set too high, the shock can "pack up" in high speed sweepers. But that isn't hard acceleration. It's cornering force at high speed.

 

In any case, your "buddy" probably needs glasses. Or he didn't know what he was looking at and was watching when you rolled out in the middle of the carousel to set up for the second apex. Unless of course you weigh like four hundred pounds and your rear spring is broken and the swingarm is angled up when you merely sit on the bike. Regardless, hearsay is inadmissable in any case. Go out and watch some bikes on track and tell us how many you see squatting under acceleration.

I counted T8-9 as the section just after the carousel, but I flunked math too.

Actually I had a problem where my shock adjustment knob was stuck in the max position. didn't seem to affect functionality. But I did purposely rest my heel on the swingarm so I can feel what it's doing. And it wa going up and down just like on TV while the chasis didn't move. It seemed to me that it compressed on accel, but I'm open to testing again.

Buddy watching was on street and it was a roll-on situation, flat out straight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello all. It's been a while since I've been here.

I agree that the bike rises under acceleration but I don't think the chain has anything much to do with it. If you assume that the chain is trying to pull the rear axle down, then you could assume that spinning the gearbox sprocket in reverse would cause the rear axle to rise. Not gonna happen

I'd suggest that it has more to do with the angle of the swingarm to the frame i.e. it is trying to lift the frame at the swingarm pivot point.

 

Hi Big Willy,

 

Of course the angle of the swingarm to the frame is the critical issue. I thought that was made clear above. But, we've had long drawn out discussions between engineers here on this particular composition of component force vectors. Sufficed to say, at worst, it is both chain pull and what I believe you may be alluding to. In any case, without the chain, there would be no angular acceleration at the rear wheel, so, at the end of the day, it all comes back to the chain anyway. Can you be more specific about just what you think "is trying to lift the frame at the swingarm pivot point" as you state in your last sentence?

 

And, actually, if you could get the motor to spin backwards, the chain would still pull the swingarm down... due to its angle with the frame. So, no, I couldn't assume it would cause the rear axle to rise.

 

 

An interesting technique used in dirtbiking is to apply the rear brake while throttling on. This allows the chain to compress the shock effectively raising the rear wheel closer to the seat, effectively lowering the rear of the bike. This allows not only better throttle control, but alters weight distribution for better traction/drive. The same could theoretically be applied to track bikes.

 

The rear brake is used as an advanced skill in several types of situations in road racing. Can you be more specific about how using the rear brake will redistribute weight "for beter traction/drive"?

 

Thanks,

racer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G'day Racer

 

The point I'm trying to make is that if you spin the motor BACKWARDS, the swingarm WILL go down so with normal motor direction, the swingarm will want to go up, not down as you have mentioned. The swingarm however is attached to both the frame and a shockie which resist this movement and turn it into forward and up motion.

In the scenario of the bike with it's front wheel against the wall, if the bike could be supported at the same height and it's shockie removed, the chain is going to pull the back wheel UP, not down.

As for what "is trying to lift the frame at the swingarm pivot point"...it is the swingarm that is angled upward toward the pivot point. If the swingarm was pointing down at this point (as would happen when applying rear brake with throttle on), then this would created a downward force at the pivot point and would lower the bike.

 

I'll give the rear brake/throttle/traction thing a bit more thought and get back

 

 

Cheers

Willy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G'day Racer

 

The point I'm trying to make is that if you spin the motor BACKWARDS, the swingarm WILL go down so with normal motor direction, the swingarm will want to go up, not down as you have mentioned. The swingarm however is attached to both the frame and a shockie which resist this movement and turn it into forward and up motion.

In the scenario of the bike with it's front wheel against the wall, if the bike could be supported at the same height and it's shockie removed, the chain is going to pull the back wheel UP, not down.

 

Sorry, Willy. Not a chance. If you doubt it, try it and see for yourself. (Nothing like the real thing, eh?)

 

I suggest you re-read my replies to Leftlaner at the top of the thread and put an eyeball on your own swingarm to notice where the chain is in relation to the swingarm. It is counter-intuitive, but, once you've scoped it out and try the "push her up against a wall" trick, I am confident that you will see the light. ;)

 

 

As for what "is trying to lift the frame at the swingarm pivot point"...it is the swingarm that is angled upward toward the pivot point. If the swingarm was pointing down at this point (as would happen when applying rear brake with throttle on), then this would created a downward force at the pivot point and would lower the bike.

 

Can you say precisely what force you believe is being applied to the swingarm and how? In what direction?

 

 

I'll give the rear brake/throttle/traction thing a bit more thought and get back

 

 

Cheers

Willy

 

Sweet as, mate! Looking forward to it.

 

Cheers,

racer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To whom it may concern:

 

Once you accept or grok that chain pull is always working to extend the suspension, raise the rear of the bike and/or pull the swingarm down, the next realization is that the forward motion of the rear wheel is also trying to push itself under the bike (ultimately lifting the front wheel) which also works to extend the suspension, raise the rear and/or pull the swingarm down.

 

So, there are actually two "component force vectors" being applied to the swingarm to create one "composite" force vector. At that point, the question becomes, which component is dominant or stronger, ie. which is more responsible for the fact that the rear of the bike raises up under acceleration? Chain pull acting to pull the swingarm down? Or the forward force of the rear wheel trying to push itself under the bike?

 

And then, just how dominant is that component? Are they relatively close or is one WAY stronger than the other? And does that relationship remain consistent across the acceleration curve?

 

racer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, several motorcycle manufaturer/racing teams along with GMD Computrak experimented with altering the position of the swingarm pivot on superbikes and GP 500's about ten years ago culminating in race bike frames with adjustable eccentric swingarm pivots an an attempt to eliminate chain pull from the equation. In fact, I believe Eddie Lawson and some other guru around here experimented with MX style chain roller/guides to limit chain pull back in the 1980's. At the end of the day, I believe the common consensus was that a little pull on your chain was a good thing. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, several motorcycle manufaturer/racing teams along with GMD Computrak experimented with altering the position of the swingarm pivot on superbikes and GP 500's about ten years ago culminating in race bike frames with adjustable eccentric swingarm pivots an an attempt to eliminate chain pull from the equation. In fact, I believe Eddie Lawson and some other guru around here experimented with MX style chain roller/guides to limit chain pull back in the 1980's. At the end of the day, I believe the common consensus was that a little pull on your chain was a good thing. :P

 

G'day Racer

BMW have a bike out at the moment that has the gearbox sprocket shaft in line with the swingarm pivot , effectively maintaining constant and consistent chain tension.

It seems that some think because of the triangulation things at play (i.e. the chain is at it's tightest when the swingarm pivot, the gearbox shaft and the rear axle are in line) that the chain is happiest trying to pull the swingarm underneath the bike.

Really putting the front wheel against a wall is more about the drive wheel wanting to shorten the wheelbase which ever way it can, be it compressing the forks or drawing the swingarm underneath the bike.

I guarantee that if the same experiment is commenced with the swingarm facing down toward the swingarm pivot point, then the chain would pull the swingarm up lowering the bike.

In other words, the chain isn't that fussy, it's more about the angle of the swingarm and the spring's ability to maintain that angle.

To look at it from another way is to say that if the force to overcome the triangulation (whatever it's called) is so great, then suspension wouldn't be necessary as we'd effectively be riding rigid rearends (aka WLA's revisited).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BMW have a bike out at the moment that has the gearbox sprocket shaft in line with the swingarm pivot , effectively maintaining constant and consistent chain tension.

Several manufacturers jumped on the band wagon of the work being done by folks like Scott Russel/Muzzy? Kawasaki/GMD fifteen years ago.

 

It isn't really about chain tension, it is about the angle at which the force is applied between the chain and swingarm. The greater the angle, the more effect the chain pull/acceleration has on the rear suspension.

 

 

It seems that some think because of the triangulation things at play (i.e. the chain is at it's tightest when the swingarm pivot, the gearbox shaft and the rear axle are in line) that the chain is happiest trying to pull the swingarm underneath the bike.

I'm not really clear what you mean here. It isn't about the chain "being happy" it is about the angle between the chain and the swingarm.

 

 

Really putting the front wheel against a wall is more about the drive wheel wanting to shorten the wheelbase which ever way it can, be it compressing the forks or drawing the swingarm underneath the bike.

Well, in reality, it won't compress the forks because the bike is trying to wheelie. But, my question is whether chain pull has more effect than the rear wheel trying to claw its way under the bike on lifting the rear suspension, ie. which is the dominant component vector responsible for raising the rear.

 

 

I guarantee that if the same experiment is commenced with the swingarm facing down toward the swingarm pivot point, then the chain would pull the swingarm up lowering the bike.

In other words, the chain isn't that fussy, it's more about the angle of the swingarm and the spring's ability to maintain that angle.

By jove, I think he's got it!

 

 

To look at it from another way is to say that if the force to overcome the triangulation (whatever it's called) is so great, then suspension wouldn't be necessary as we'd effectively be riding rigid rearends (aka WLA's revisited).

Precisely! That is exactly what happens under acceleration. We are effectively riding rigid (or more rigid) rearends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't really about chain tension, it is about the angle at which the force is applied between the chain and swingarm. The greater the angle, the more effect the chain pull/acceleration has on the rear suspension.

 

Here's another approach...The chain(because of sprocket sizes) is actually at an opposite angle to the swingarm. Wouldn't you think at this angle, the chain is trying to lift the rear of the swingarm? You are so hung up on thinking that the chain is pulling the swingarm down

 

 

 

I'm not really clear what you mean here. It isn't about the chain "being happy" it is about the angle between the chain and the swingarm.

 

When suspension is compressed, the chain gets tighter. If it is already tight due to driving the rear wheel, then compressing the rear suspension will in theory make it tighter. But because it is already at it's tightest, the gearbox sprocket or the rear wheel must rotate fractionally to allow. Sorry, but it's hard to put into words to make clear. If you watch rear camera footage on Rossi's bike, you will see the suspension moving freely under both constant drive and acceleration.

 

 

Well, in reality, it won't compress the forks because the bike is trying to wheelie. But, my question is whether chain pull has more effect than the rear wheel trying to claw its way under the bike on lifting the rear suspension, ie. which is the dominant component vector responsible for raising the rear.

Of course it will compress the forks. Once again, the wall thing is a bad analogy and is nothing like a bike travelling down the road. If you can forget about this analogy, then you will see that the chain is NOT trying to pull the wheel under the bike

 

 

By jove, I think he's got it!

 

I always had it. With respect Racer and referral to your first post, you seemed to think that the chain played a major role and I have argued the whole time that it didn't and more to the point, that it doesn't actually want to pull the swingarm down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Willy,

 

I am well aware that a motorcycle drive chain gets tighter as the swingarm compresses and the rear axle travel describes an arc. With respect, that fact has nothing to do with the subject at hand unless the chain is improperly adjusted and binding under compression.

 

Aside from the bike that you said "BMW has out" and some experimental racing machines with adjustable swingarm pivots, the chain and swingarm of the majority of motorcycles are not parallel. Hence, being that the swingarm is typically oriented downward, chain pull applies downward force to the swingarm. One need only look at a motorcycle up close to see this. As for Rossi's bike, I don't know how its swingarm pivot is oriented, however, while chain force applied to a typical swingarm may resist compression, it is not necessarily enough to prevent all compression. And, at the end of the day, that resistance to compression turns out to be a good thing for getting a good drive out of a corner. I already covered this in my second reply to Leftlaner near the top of this thread.

 

For the record, I never claimed that chain pull was the dominant force responsible for motorcyle suspension extension under acceleration. I said that, as the only link to the primary driving force of the machine, it was ultimately responsible; but, that it was only one of the component forces directly involved. I thought it might be interesting to discuss which component of force might be dominant in that process. Unfortunately, you seem to be of the opinion that chain pull isn't involved. So, perhaps somebody else will pick up that stick.

 

Good luck,

 

racer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Willy,

 

I am well aware that a motorcycle drive chain gets tighter as the swingarm compresses and the rear axle travel describes an arc. With respect, that fact has nothing to do with the subject at hand unless the chain is improperly adjusted and binding under compression.

 

Aside from the bike that you said "BMW has out" and some experimental racing machines with adjustable swingarm pivots, the chain and swingarm of the majority of motorcycles are not parallel. Hence, being that the swingarm is typically oriented downward, chain pull applies downward force to the swingarm. One need only look at a motorcycle up close to see this. As for Rossi's bike, I don't know how its swingarm pivot is oriented, however, while chain force applied to a typical swingarm may resist compression, it is not necessarily enough to prevent all compression. And, at the end of the day, that resistance to compression turns out to be a good thing for getting a good drive out of a corner. I already covered this in my second reply to Leftlaner near the top of this thread.

 

For the record, I never claimed that chain pull was the dominant force responsible for motorcyle suspension extension under acceleration. I said that, as the only link to the primary driving force of the machine, it was ultimately responsible; but, that it was only one of the component forces directly involved. I thought it might be interesting to discuss which component of force might be dominant in that process. Unfortunately, you seem to be of the opinion that chain pull isn't involved. So, perhaps somebody else will pick up that stick.

 

Good luck,

 

racer

G'day Racer,

I can't leave this one alone d'oh.

In your second paragraph you say because the swingarm is pointing down, then the chain pull applies downward force to the swingarm. I've looked closely at mine and like I've said before, the only time I can see it applying downward force is if the motor backfires and starts in reverse.

Forget about the wall experiment and try this one...

Put the bike in first and apply the rear brake. Let out the clutch. What does the back end want to do? It wants to go down. It does NOT want to pull the swingarm underneath the bike.

 

Would be good if someone else would chime in. Is it only you and me here Racer? Maybe everyone else is out riding.

 

No hard feelliings

 

Willy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rear brake is used as an advanced skill in several types of situations in road racing. Can you be more specific about how using the rear brake will redistribute weight "for beter traction/drive"?

 

Thanks,

racer

 

G'day Racer

 

I've given this some thought and decided that this is what happens...

 

By applying the rear brake with the throttle on means something has to give. If the motor is unable to turn the rear wheel or has resistance, then it would want to spin itself around the rear wheel thus biasing weight towards the rear which in turn creates more friction between the the tyre and surface which enables more traction.

 

Does this sound plausible?

 

Willy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G'day Racer,

Put the bike in first and apply the rear brake. Let out the clutch. What does the back end want to do? It wants to go down. It does NOT want to pull the swingarm underneath the bike.

 

So, contracting chain pull under acceleration tries to lengthen the wheelbase?

 

Can you post a video of you conducting your experiment that demonstrates the rear compressing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rear brake is used as an advanced skill in several types of situations in road racing. Can you be more specific about how using the rear brake will redistribute weight "for beter traction/drive"?

 

Thanks,

racer

 

G'day Racer

 

I've given this some thought and decided that this is what happens...

 

By applying the rear brake with the throttle on means something has to give. If the motor is unable to turn the rear wheel or has resistance, then it would want to spin itself around the rear wheel thus biasing weight towards the rear which in turn creates more friction between the the tyre and surface which enables more traction.

 

Does this sound plausible?

 

Willy

 

Applying the rear brake adds more weight to the front, not the rear. And, in any case, adding more weight and braking force together to the same wheel, front or rear, increases the load and stress on the contact patch which typically reduces the amount of available traction. If the front wheel is light to begin with, for instance when you are cresting a hill, dragging the rear brake can add weight to the front and help create more traction at the front. But, even if you are accelerating, dragging the rear brake counter-acts the acceleration and weight transfer to the rear, hence, why you can control a wheelie with the rear brake or bring the front down with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G'day Racer,

Put the bike in first and apply the rear brake. Let out the clutch. What does the back end want to do? It wants to go down. It does NOT want to pull the swingarm underneath the bike.

 

So, contracting chain pull under acceleration tries to lengthen the wheelbase?

 

Can you post a video of you conducting your experiment that demonstrates the rear compressing?

 

Wheelbase lengthening really doesn't come into it but yes, wheelbase will lengthen. So what? It's not as though there is any resistance to lengthening the wheelbase after all there is no wall in front of you same as there isn't when you are racing/riding.

 

As for video, I don't think so. How 'bout you sit on your bike in your garage, start it up, put it in first, apply the back brake, let out the clutch and you tell me what happens. It'll take about a minute. I've just done it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...