invacar LightBulbFun's Invacar & general ramble thread, index on page 1, survivors lists on Pages 24/134 & AdgeCutler's Invacar Mk12 Restoration from Page 186 onwards, still harping on...

11,881 · October 4

Didn't know they had belts. I remember looking in a few. Maybe they were the earlier ones.

Anyhow as I already said, I reckon it stood up to the lamp post well.

17,657 · October 4

On 02/10/2024 at 19:52, LightBulbFun said:

I like this shot as its said to be in the East of London somewhere, also bonus 2CV sneaking into the lineup of Invacars for @dollywobbler

https://www.deutschefotothek.de/documents/obj/71874530

On 02/10/2024 at 21:06, richardmorris said:

Actually, looking closer, it’s a left hand drive ( driver door mirror) snd I think Belgian spec ( grey rubber bumper insert snd not black tape ). We can all be nerds over something !

On 02/10/2024 at 21:13, richardmorris said:

I’d guess Belgium, but one of those foreign johnnies yes. The main interest is why there, in with all the invacars?

hang on a second this is sounding awfully familiar!

On 15/01/2024 at 10:58, Mrs6C said:

One of my university lecturers had one leg (I forget which) and he strode around the place at speed, with the aid of crutches. He lived in Belgium and commuted back and forth for term time. He drove a Belgian-registered Citroen 2CV.

I guess it had a hand throttle/brake facility fitted and the clutch pedal was retained either 'as is' or extended to the right, according to the available leg to operate it.

6,112 · October 4

You are getting muddled up with the crash test stuff.The model 70 passed eec construction and use regs for a tricycle ( door locks,seat mounting etc) but failed crash testing to such an extent the dhss refused to publish miras report,and forbid Mira from talking about it.

Look,I have always loved invalid cars,long before you were born, but part of being a well rounded enthusiast is to not gloss over their failings or quirks,nor be blind to their public perception both then and now.You need a very thick skin to like,let alone drive,something 99% of people think is terrible or shouldn't be on the road,I know that from experience.

17,657 · October 4

43 minutes ago, plasticvandan said:

You are getting muddled up with the crash test stuff.The model 70 passed eec construction and use regs for a tricycle ( door locks,seat mounting etc) but failed crash testing to such an extent the dhss refused to publish miras report,and forbid Mira from talking about it.

Look,I have always loved invalid cars,long before you were born, but part of being a well rounded enthusiast is to not gloss over their failings or quirks,nor be blind to their public perception both then and now.You need a very thick skin to like,let alone drive,something 99% of people think is terrible or shouldn't be on the road,I know that from experience.

an excerpt from the quite critical "How Tricky are the trikes" Motor Magazine

"the latest versions although with a strengthened chassis and other modifications largely meet the ECE 12 regulations concerning reward movement of the steering system and integrity of the passenger compartment and fuel system in a 30 Mph Barrier test. They do not however meet any regulations defining the maximum forces allowable on an instrumented dummy in a barrier collision of this kind when it strikes part of the interior such as the steering system"

regarding the Maximum forces applied to a dummy by the steering system, this Hansard report here goes into detail on that, to say basically that, Steering wheel Model 70's are compliant, its just that the normal industry standard setup was not setup to handle tiller bars or handle bars so they could not measure it

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1975-05-23/debates/79ba0cf3-1dd1-45d3-8539-d1ac01240d05/InvalidTricycles

Quote

Despite allegations to the contrary, all invalid three-wheelers built during the past 20 years have complied with the Construction and Use Regulations applicable to motor cars rather than the less stringent requirements for invalid vehicles. During the past two years new regulations have been introduced aimed at providing greater safety to the occupant in accidents.
The Model 70 complies with all these regulations with one exception. The requirements of Regulation 16, "Protective Steering Mechanism", are met by steering wheel versions of the Model 70.
In the case of "tiller" and "bicycle" type steering vehicles, the part of the test which requires a dummy to be thrown on to the steering mechanism cannot yet be carried out because a method of testing has not yet been devised. The Department is working in conjunction with MIRA on this problem. When it has been resolved tests will be carried out to ensure that these types of steering control meet the regulation requirements, too. We shall generally make further safety improvements where we can, just as manufacturers do. For example, we are in process of improving crash protection of the driver by fitting a roll-over bar to future production.

this is what I mean by when you actually dig into the details like this you realise just how much misinformation is flying around about these things and how much more there is to their story

3,066 · October 4

if the fuel tank is mounted on the grp bulkhead with no firewall then i would be investing in nomex overalls, probably a decent helmet too. you can quote all you like but as a daily i'd have anything post 2000

16,715 · October 4

Crash test regulations were, in the 1970s, exceptionally limited. Stating that a model 70 "passed" a crash test then is absolutely nothing to get excited about, or indeed to be relied upon. It covers almost nothing, and compared to ANY crash testing from the 90's onwards, it's a complete joke.

And as you want to constantly make reference to specific incidents/comments/anecdotal information:

Even from someone who loves these things and drives one about a fair bit:

"They were massively flawed, this is a massive death trap really, and I'm aware of that every time I drive it"

Also... you've made the point that Ian has never been left stranded by his. Fair point, but how many times has he had to do running repairs at the roadside to keep going? And he has a workshop to maintain it. You're planning to keep it on the road, and (please correct me if I am wrong) have never even jacked up a car and taken a wheel off?

I absolutely applaud your enthusiasm, but am genuinely concerned that you just don't appreciate what you're trying to achieve.

I look at it from the point of view of being a 30+ year experienced driver, a time-served mechanic and a very experienced engineer, and I would not even remotely consider trying to do what you are planning.

16,715 · October 4

Simialrly, Stating that the car* meets construction and use regulations is somewhat meaningless. C&U regs don't include basic crashworthyness. Yes, it covers sizing of seatbelt and anchorages, but the basic structure of the vehicle isn't (and definitely wasn't in the 1970's) considered.

Example: An Austin Metro (some 10+ years newer than a model70) also met construction and use regulations. Not only in the 1980s, but also right up until 1997. However:

They collapse like a crisp packet.

It's also possible to build a kit-car, which (by passing an IVA test) can be shown to comply with C&U regulations. But I wouldn't suggest for a moment that a GRP-bodied kit car is anything other than a mobile coffin. This coming from someone who dailyed a GRP bodied kit car from the 1970s. It was utter shit, and if I had hit anything (or anyone hit me) I would likely have been dead.

The other thing to note about crash testing prior to the 90s, is that all of it was utterly unrealistic. You'll note from this:

that all of the testing was done square-on into a solid concrete block. This was subsequently shown to be completely unrealistic, as cars that had been designed to cope well in this test would then completely collapse in actual crashes. This is where the 40/40 test (40mph, 40% overlap) test was devised from as it far more accurately represents crashes that actually happen. If you want to be very worried, look at a modern 40/10 test (40MPH, 10% overlap) as some even very "crashworthy" cars come out looking rather worse for wear and with some bad injuries likely.

My point here is: being designed to pass construction and use regs and passing a "crash test" in the 60s and 70s was absolutely no measure of a vehicle being safe. They just weren't.

22,392 · October 4

I think the spare wheel being in the engine bay of the DAF44 was listed as a safety feature, so had to be mounted on different sides depending whether the car was left or right hand drive.

16,715 · October 4

Was it horizontally mounted?

... like this?

https://autoshite.com/topic/45030-masha-заз-таврiя-zaz-tavria-слава-україні-slavaukraini-lets-get-legal-then-decide

Crash test shown on page 2, where the wheel was the most rigid thing in the engine bay and successfully managed to punch through the bulkhead.

Crash safety in the 70s really was dire wasn't it!

13,272 · October 4

1 minute ago, Talbot said:

Crash safety in the 70s really was dire wasn't it!

According to my dad everything in the 70s was dire.

He also maintained everything went downhill since then.

3,994 · October 4

9 minutes ago, Talbot said:

Was it horizontally mounted?

... like this?

https://autoshite.com/topic/45030-masha-заз-таврiя-zaz-tavria-слава-україні-slavaukraini-lets-get-legal-then-decide

Crash test shown on page 2, where the wheel was the most rigid thing in the engine bay and successfully managed to punch through the bulkhead.

Crash safety in the 70s really was dire wasn't it!

You could also argue that modern crash safety standards have significantly contributed to modern cars being far heavier, and all other things being equal, more damaging when they hit something to it, ignoring such as pedestrian safety pop up bonnets of course.

35,402 · October 4

On 02/10/2024 at 19:52, LightBulbFun said:

I like this shot as its said to be in the East of London somewhere, also bonus 2CV sneaking into the lineup of Invacars for @dollywobbler

https://www.deutschefotothek.de/documents/obj/71874530

Done a bit more digging, it turns out the Estate agent is still going with offices in East Ham.

About Us | McDowalls Estate Agents | Eastham, London

17,657 · October 4

2 hours ago, Talbot said:

Crash test regulations were, in the 1970s, exceptionally limited. Stating that a model 70 "passed" a crash test then is absolutely nothing to get excited about, or indeed to be relied upon. It covers almost nothing, and compared to ANY crash testing from the 90's onwards, it's a complete joke.

this I dont deny, that the crash tests back then where much more rudimentary then that of those in the last 20-30 years, but I just wish to point it out that they where compliant of the time and that the Ministry did go out of their way to ensure compliance and improve safety over the life time of the vehicle, again so many people on here think so badly of them, which is not really deserved, its not like they where *not* safety tested at all, or that the ministry gave no thought to safety at all, which is what I see a lot of people claiming or alluding to, how many cars of the 1970's had any sort of rollover protection like the rollover bar that later Model 70's like REV has?

I just think that Invacars really got/get a bad rep they dont deserve, its quite remarkable to see how different other people from outside the UK react to Invacars, in that they accept them for what they are "meh whatever, its another small car of the 1960's-1970's" see for example how our own @IronStar came into this thread and was rightfully so going "whats the big deal? its just another small car like a Fiat 500 or Classic Mini"

2 hours ago, Talbot said:

Even from someone who loves these things and drives one about a fair bit:

"They were massively flawed, this is a massive death trap really, and I'm aware of that every time I drive it"

and I dont agree with @dollywobbler on that either, yes they where not perfect, and yes by todays standards they would not be considered very safe, I will concur they had their flaws/foibles, but I would not call them massively flawed either in the same way I dont think its fair how you call them unfit for purpose, I dont see people saying "oh the mini was unfit for purpose even back in the day" just on the grounds that they are unsafe in a crash, back then the Mini was seen as a perfectly acceptable vehicle

or, look at the Modern Citroen Ami Electric, is that any safer then a Model 70 in a crash? any more stable then one if do sharp sudden steering inputs? not really, but @Kiltox still paid £7995~ for one and plenty of people are out there buying em for getting about the place

and thats the light the Model 70 should be viewed in, in the same way the Ctiroen Ami Electric is a small car to help someone get from Point A to Point B, the Model 70 was a Small car to help a disabled person get from point A to Point B, and in that regard they both do their job very quite well no? and if that disabled person needed something more then what the Model 70 could provide (ie they had a family to care for) the Ministry would issue them an adapted normal car if that was possible, in the same way the Citroen Ami is not forced upon every abled body person out there

thats what im arguing here, i am not talking about myself and my Model 70 and how I might fare with it in todays world, that its own argument, but here I argue just for the sake of all Invacars

2 hours ago, Talbot said:

Also... you've made the point that Ian has never been left stranded by his. Fair point, but how many times has he had to do running repairs at the roadside to keep going?

AFAIK a fair majority of his roadside repairs where his own doing, the 2 major ones that come mine are when TWC shredded a drive-belt, and he had to call upon his previous wife to deliver a new belt etc for him to fit at the roadside, but this was itself caused by him fitting old-ruined and miss-matched pulleys before the trip, and then the other time was when he was driving TWC to the new unit, and as he went to put the windscreen demister on, he reached for and moved the choke-leaver instead, putting the choke on full which of course lead to unhappy running, and then in the process of diagnosing this, he then turned off the electronic ignition unit he had fitted, and forgot to turn it back on which then lead to even more unhappy running! the only other major notable incident is when TWC spat out a spark plug, that one could be blamed on the Model 70 itself, but also could of been down to Mr Wobbler not tightening the spark plugs down fully when he last had them out (to check engine compression IIRC)

2 hours ago, Talbot said:

You're planning to keep it on the road, and (please correct me if I am wrong) have never even jacked up a car and taken a wheel off?

switching back to the discussion of me and REV, I have jacked up REV and done things on/under her I have, but not explicitly taken a wheel off no

2 hours ago, Talbot said:

I absolutely applaud your enthusiasm, but am genuinely concerned that you just don't appreciate what you're trying to achieve.

I look at it from the point of view of being a 30+ year experienced driver, a time-served mechanic and a very experienced engineer, and I would not even remotely consider trying to do what you are planning.

I wont disagree with the fact that I am a disabled person with very little real world car experience, those are facts that are not in my favour here

but whats the other alternative? I cant magic 30 years of experience out of thin air like you have, we all have to start somewhere?, Yes I realise that I am not exactly going about this in the most sensible/easy fashion, but as I said previously, life has shat on me in many ways, im not going to go through my life story here and ask for sympathy, just ask for understanding, as to why I am so determined here, this is my ,middle finger to life itself, as difficult and as painful as it may be, I *will* do this, and I have already fought tooth and nail to get this far, I am certainly not going to give up now

I know it probably sounds laughable to most, but this is quite literally my life goal, I just want to own, drive and enjoy a Model 70 for myself, is that really too much to ask for? am I not allowed to fight for that? and am I not allowed to look forward to the prospects that it might bring? surely any car is better then none? I am not downgrading from a modern car to a Model 70, I am upgrading from being housebound to at least having some wheels, some means of personal independence and I am really quite excited at that prospect in itself

and I do feel like there is a bit of doom and gloom on the go, in that the way people seem to be reacting, to me getting REV as previously mentioned, they do seem to also be surprisingly reliable compared to a lot of 1970's chod, I mean, just compare Dollywobbler's Model 70 to @captain_70s Dolomite for example, the Model 70 keeps working despite the relative neglect, where as the Dolomite keeps FTP'ing despite @captain_70s pretty much rebuilding it/its engine.

Surely if one is determined to own a fine piece of Historic Vehicle Tax class Autoshite, a Model 70 is not a bad vehicle to cut ones teeth on? especially for someone who already knows these vehicles by in detail by heart, again I do realise that as a disabled person, who has very little actual spanner time compared to most on this forum, that I am at a major disadvantage, but with that in mind I dont see how a Model 70 would make that disadvantage any-worse compared to say me buying say @wuvvum's Citroen Visa, perhaps the parts availability is a bit better and there is a large knowledge base for that sort of vehicle, but again, for me and my Model 70 I have explicitly acquired a large stash of parts to support myself, and I have spent the last 6 years studying these vehicles in the minute-finest of details, and I have the real world experience of @dollywobbler, @Zelandeth and others with Model 70's I can draw on, so I would like to think in that regard at least I am not completely worse off?

4,168 · October 4

Wait until your car is a daily driver like the Dolly was and you'll see how hard it is to keep old junk on the road.

Didn't that other Invacare get a new engine too ?

10,965 · October 4

We'll stop putting an E on Invacar , if you stop putting an H in the word 'WERE ! '

31,101 · October 4

Let’s be clear - you’d need to be fucking mental to want to drive an Ami

9,906 · October 4

14 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

...some Model 70's even had a full harness type arrangement, because if you think about it for a moment...

I've got two arms & legs and the full harness that I fitted to my 1303 was so inconvenient that I took it out again.

3,994 · October 4

24 minutes ago, barefoot said:

I've got two arms & legs and the full harness that I fitted to my 1303 was so inconvenient that I took it out again.

I had one in my MG many years ago.

I found the same despite being in my 20s and able bodied, albeit a trifle (not the Pollitt kind) overweight.

3,994 · October 4

You could have saved 400 pages or so by just saying I know a lot of people think it's unsafe and it's a stupid idea, even Dollywobbler says so, but tough I'm going to do it if I can. That would have saved you plenty of time spent putting your unique interpretations on a lot of facts

1,382 · October 4

Make no mistake, I said it’s another small old car, and what I meant by that is “an absolute deathtrap in a collision with anything remotely modern”. However, risk appetite varies, and I can’t tell you that you shouldn’t because it’s unsafe. Not without being a hypocrite at least, because I’m doing that myself, albeit not on daily basis. Trying to defend its safety is pointless, as it’s fundamentally unsafe.

What I can tell you though is, is stories of how much money I’ve plowed into keeping those cars on the road, and how incredibly awful limping cars home is.

I think that having this (or original Fiat 500, or Mini, or Yugo, or….) as your only vehicle is a recipe for not enjoying it and being aggravated. I know you read my Florida thread. Now imagine I was stuck waiting for parts, rebuilding carb, LPG/Carb dudes, having non-functional aircon in 50 degree celsius summer, and most importantly - having no other car to do things. Since that car was first dropped off at a garage, until it was finally functional again the other day, I’ve driven some 5000 absolutely mechanically uneventful kilometers in other cars.

Do I also see why some people are genuinely concerned about this. Yes. Yes I do. Really.

HOWEVER

You seem like an intelligent dude. I don’t think you fully understand what you’re getting into, but at the same time I think everyone’s warned you enough times, it’s getting old, and sometimes you need to try for yourself. I fully understand why you’re so committed to this, and I applaud all the amazing people on here that are helping to make it happen. If I wasn’t half way across the continent and requiring a visa to come, I’d genuinely offer to drive it part way home. I hope that it will be great fun, it never throws a wobble, and all the dire warnings will come unfulfilled. Just try finding a garage to store it in, to significantly reduce the chances of some idiot ruining it for you.

Oh and, full harness is awful. It’s not very comfortable and takes way too long to strap in.

Now for a real question about Invacars. Did ministry consider building something after Model 70? Late 70s to 2003 is a long time.

16,715 · October 4

1 hour ago, LightBulbFun said:

but whats the other alternative?

Take the very sound advice of many people on this forum. Buy a K11 micra or similar and get some road experience in something dull but reliable, vaguely crashworthy and can be repaired by any garage in existance.

I am astonished at your rebuttal of Ian's comments on his video. This is from someone who has driven many miles in a model 70 and knows just how awful it is. But you know better? Really?

It's absolutely not like any other car from the 70s. It's nothing like a Mini or a classic Fiat 500. Both of those are significantly more stable on the road and having a steel body offer at least a modicum of protection to the occupants.

You're cherry-picking all the facts/figures that you want to about a model 70 and are completely ignoring the ones that don't fit your narrative. It's impressive tbh.

2,738 · October 4

3 minutes ago, Talbot said:

This is from someone who has driven many miles in a model 70 and knows just how awful it is. But you know better? Really?

Again as someone who has owned and driven about 1500 miles in Invacars I’ve spoken of my experiences and how unsafe they are but again my advice to get a 2nd more modern car was ignored, even when I offered a more modern car for FREE I was ignored, I fear it’s best to just let him crack on and figure it out himself

18,794 · October 4

1 hour ago, LightBulbFun said:

they do seem to also be surprisingly reliable compared to a lot of 1970's chod, I mean, just compare Dollywobbler's Model 70 to @captain_70s Dolomite for example, the Model 70 keeps working despite the relative neglect, where as the Dolomite keeps FTP'ing despite @captain_70s pretty much rebuilding it/its engine.

Sorry, but saying that car model A is clearly more reliable than Model B by comparing single examples is a bit bollocks. I was once attacked by an angry chicken but never by a dog. Would I say that, thus, chickens are bigger threats than dogs? Of course not.

33,508 · October 4

21 minutes ago, D.E said:

single examples is a bit bollocks.

Yes but 40 years ago (I found the answer myself in the absence of a reply @LightBulbFun) someone drove one to France so it’s all gravy. Never mind it was forty years ago, the world was unrecognisably different and the guy was an experienced motorist.

Ultimately, I’ve given up trying to be heard, but admire others for still shouting from the rooftops that this is dangerous. It’s 50 years since they were released, the owner’s disability stops him from working, he has no mechanical knowledge, no mechanic earmarked, no garage to work in, no street level storage for a jack and stands, limited and dated motoring experience and perhaps not even the strength to do the things I take for granted.

Dez, it’s not personal. It’s just something you’ve probably not experienced before; people not saying “ok dear whatever you think” and making you think hard about things.

Quoting a million miles of text doesn’t make your argument any stronger, it just serves to prove you’re not really listening.

The good news is this will all die down when you prove us all wrong. The bad news is this won’t happen.

Nonetheless - good luck dude.

18,055 · October 4

Not all Triumphs are as unreliable as @captain_70s. I'm sure the Scottish atmosphere must have something to do with it, certainly in the rust stakes. I was dailying mine until 2004 when Mrs Yoss passed her test and didn't want to drive them. Admittedly I usually had two (or more) on the road at any one time but that was more by choice but did give me the advantage of a back up vehicle.

Yes they took a bit of fiddling with but I'd get in and drive them anywhere without ever thinking I might not get to my destination. In around 1996 I started seeing a girl in Yorkshire and spent a year doing 600 mile weekends. I put 22,000 miles on one car that year. It did snap an input shaft up there but luckily I knew somebody in Leeds who collected them and got a new one and fitted it the same weekend! So yeah things happen but that's part of life. You're all crying Dez's lack of experience but he has to start somewhere. He can't get the experience without doing these things.

Also, if anybody is following my stories in the bus thread at the moment I spent a few years working for a friend in Watford and was doing the the round trip from Southampton two or three times a week, all in 1960s cars. I see no reason why the Invacar should be worse, its different but essentially the same technology.

These days of course I drive around in two thirty year old Škodas. The blue one is about as technologically advanced as the Triumphs with its 1300cc pushrod engine and carburetor. Most days both get used and again nobody has died (yet).

33,508 · October 4

6 minutes ago, Yoss said:

These days of course I drive around in two thirty year old Škodas. The blue one is about as technologically advanced as the Triumphs with its 1300cc pushrod engine and carburetor. Most days both get used and again nobody has died (yet).

How many of these apply to you?

8 minutes ago, BorniteIdentity said:

It’s 50 years since they were released, the owner’s disability stops him from working, he has no mechanical knowledge, no mechanic earmarked, no garage to work in, no street level storage for a jack and stands, limited and dated motoring experience and perhaps not even the strength to do the things I take for granted.

OBVIOUSLY it goes without saying: nobody on a forum dedicated to running and enjoying shit old cars is saying "don't run a shit old car". But I'm guessing your first car wasn't 50 years old, you're not disabled, you don't live in a high rise and everything else.

Encouragement is one thing. There is - however - a line where it crosses into incitement to do something dangerous. I know what side of the line I'd rather be on when the history books are written.

27,659 · October 4

Where's that image of a horse and a train when you need it?

16,715 · October 4

11 minutes ago, Yoss said:

You're all crying Dez's lack of experience but he has to start somewhere. He can't get the experience without doing these things.

True, but starting here is like learning to swim by being thrown in the sea, fully clothed, with a breeze-block strapped to one leg.

All while claiming "well, other people can do it, why can't I?"

1,474 · October 4

When is it getting delivered again?

20,210 · October 4

I cannot keep up with this thread. So I have skipped a few pages. I am looking at the image of the east end repair shop.

https://www.deutschefotothek.de/documents/obj/71874530

The bus in the background is route 58.

https://bus-routes-in-london.fandom.com/wiki/London_Buses_route_58

The timetable from 82 which I doubt changed between 78 and 82.

https://londonbusesbyadam.zenfolio.com/route-58-nov-1982.pdf

Looking up the phone code of 476 it comes to an area defined as ALBert Dock 476 Plaistow & Canning Town [Dock in the East End] on several pages.

next we have a map of the bus route from 1964. Again i doubt much would have changed over the intervening years.

I am thinking that this repair shop was along the Barking Road.

invacar LightBulbFun's Invacar & general ramble thread, index on page 1, survivors lists on Pages 24/134 & AdgeCutler's Invacar Mk12 Restoration from Page 186 onwards, still harping on...

Recommended Posts

Mally

Link to comment

Share on other sites

LightBulbFun

Link to comment

Share on other sites

plasticvandan

Link to comment

Share on other sites

LightBulbFun

Link to comment

Share on other sites

big_al_granvia

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Talbot

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Talbot

Link to comment

Share on other sites

HillmanImp

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Talbot

Link to comment

Share on other sites

reb

Link to comment

Share on other sites

chadders

Link to comment

Share on other sites

MiniMinorMk3

Link to comment

Share on other sites

LightBulbFun

Link to comment

Share on other sites

GingerNuttz

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Christine

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Kiltox

Link to comment

Share on other sites

barefoot

Link to comment

Share on other sites

chadders

Link to comment

Share on other sites

chadders

Link to comment

Share on other sites

IronStar

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Talbot

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Weird Car

Link to comment

Share on other sites

D.E

Link to comment

Share on other sites

BorniteIdentity

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Yoss

Link to comment

Share on other sites

BorniteIdentity

Link to comment

Share on other sites