Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > Firearms and Other Weapons Forum > Firearms General Discussion > Rifle Forum
Articles Chat Room Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files



Advertise Here
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-15-2010, 12:04 AM
The Heretic's Avatar
The Heretic The Heretic is offline
To the surface!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Orygun
Age: 59
Posts: 6,327
Thanks: 496
Thanked 6,539 Times in 2,722 Posts
Default



Advertise Here

Yup, I found the Blake Stevens book and he has a short chapter on the Ishapore FALs. Basically India was in negotiations with FN and those broke down. India decided to make their own FAL based on drawings of both inch and metric patterns they had gotten from FN. They eventually also bought some FALs from FN, but the Ishapore FALs were not made legally (i.e., without license from FN - at least as of 1993 when the book was published).

So, Ishapore FALs are a mishmash of both inch and metric patterns.
Old 05-18-2010, 04:44 PM
RevAl RevAl is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 12
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Mine hated surplus ammo(7.62).By the 3rd and 4th shot the cases would not come out of the rifle.I had to let the barrel cool down to get them out.It did shoot .308 Win. just fine tho.It was a good rifle,but I got rid of it after trying 3 different scope mount systems that never worked.
Old 05-18-2010, 07:34 PM
sarge912's Avatar
sarge912 sarge912 is offline
Father of 11 husband of 1
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northeast Ohio
Age: 62
Posts: 5,870
Thanks: 2,775
Thanked 5,702 Times in 2,706 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RevAl View Post
Mine hated surplus ammo(7.62).By the 3rd and 4th shot the cases would not come out of the rifle.I had to let the barrel cool down to get them out.It did shoot .308 Win. just fine tho.It was a good rifle,but I got rid of it after trying 3 different scope mount systems that never worked.
Some folks clean the bore but don't use a chamber brush.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct...tnumber=367747
If you don't already do this, it might help the sticking problem. It cleared it up for our Ishy.
Old 05-19-2010, 01:33 AM
GaPatriot GaPatriot is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 240
Thanks: 138
Thanked 188 Times in 95 Posts
Default

A few years ago,Gibbs Rifle Company(www.gibbsrifle.com) made their own versions of the No.5(.303) & the No.7(.308) Jungle Carbines. They also made what they called the "Quest Extreme Carbines". These were supposed to be a sort of "survival rifle",with it's own survival kit in the buttstock. If I remember correctly,these were considered very good rifles,and shot all commercial loads tested without any problems.
The Following User Says Thank You to GaPatriot For This Useful Post:
Old 05-19-2010, 04:36 AM
sarge912's Avatar
sarge912 sarge912 is offline
Father of 11 husband of 1
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northeast Ohio
Age: 62
Posts: 5,870
Thanks: 2,775
Thanked 5,702 Times in 2,706 Posts
Default Neat idea, thanks

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaPatriot View Post
A few years ago,Gibbs Rifle Company(www.gibbsrifle.com) made their own versions of the No.5(.303) & the No.7(.308) Jungle Carbines. They also made what they called the "Quest Extreme Carbines". These were supposed to be a sort of "survival rifle",with it's own survival kit in the buttstock.
Every once and awhile a light goes on in my head and I say to myself, "Self, that's a great idea, why didn't I thing of that?"
I have several long guns that I can adapt to that same idea. Just what I need, a new project."
Old 05-19-2010, 06:16 AM
SeekHer's Avatar
SeekHer SeekHer is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 7,097
Thanks: 28
Thanked 4,911 Times in 2,942 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaPatriot View Post
A few years ago,Gibbs Rifle Company(www.gibbsrifle.com) made their own versions of the No.5(.303) & the No.7(.308) Jungle Carbines. They also made what they called the "Quest Extreme Carbines". These were supposed to be a sort of "survival rifle",with it's own survival kit in the buttstock. If I remember correctly,these were considered very good rifles,and shot all commercial loads tested without any problems.
Re: the various Lee-Enfields models and modifications Taken from the Gibbs site:
The following are past production rifles and carbines Gibbs Rifle Company, Inc. manufactured up until 2004.

Please note that these rifles are NO LONGER in production and NO LONGER in stock. We DO NOT have parts or accessories for these firearms.


They are now producing the 1903A2 Springfield and have limited guns so if you want one better order it quick.
Old 09-07-2010, 08:20 PM
strider72's Avatar
strider72 strider72 is offline
Infidel/Warmonger/NeoCon
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Somewhere in the hills of the Appalachians
Posts: 508
Thanks: 505
Thanked 347 Times in 169 Posts
Default

I had an Izzy a few years ago myself but it had feeding probs so I let it go... Unfortunately I just ran across another Izzy at $169 at a local pawn shop and now am wanting another... Maybe this one will feed..
Old 09-07-2010, 09:31 PM
556X45's Avatar
556X45 556X45 is offline
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Utah
Posts: 6,484
Thanks: 21,658
Thanked 9,523 Times in 4,209 Posts
Default

I own one I think its fine rifle cosidering age. I shoot my alot no problems

Last edited by 556X45; 09-07-2010 at 09:33 PM.. Reason: typing
Old 09-07-2010, 09:37 PM
Texas Pete Texas Pete is offline
This is a great survival forum
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Garland, TX
Posts: 7,437
Thanks: 1,703
Thanked 5,343 Times in 2,895 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sailinghudson25 View Post
Most folks biggest question is can it handle modern 308 winchester loads? From this website, it claims yes and no based on year made. And if it is a yes, they recommend lighter caliber bullets.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?p=867583

You have to be careful with 50+ year old guns that use modern ammunition. Even more so if the gun has been rechambered for another caliber. If the bore looks good, then I'd pick it up as long as you have an intention of reloading bullets yourself.

This ame caution goes for 308 nato chilean and spanish mausers.

A classic example of this is the M1 garand, but not the chamber the gas operating system.

The Ishapore Arsonel .308 were not rechambered they wre built from the ground up as 7.63X51 NATO and can easily handle .308. The steel is better quality than the old .303's and the magazines hold 12 rounds and are straight.

They are good well built rifles.
Old 09-07-2010, 09:43 PM
Texas Pete Texas Pete is offline
This is a great survival forum
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Garland, TX
Posts: 7,437
Thanks: 1,703
Thanked 5,343 Times in 2,895 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeekHer View Post
No, you are very correct and the rifles where made under license the same as they were made here in Canada and Australia and in the USA during the First World War and Second by Remington, Savage etc.

The .308s on the other hand are strictly an Indian invention so that they could use NATO ammo for their police and militia troops who got issued these rifle. Their front liners used the FN-FAL variant or whatever the current rifle is. They just converted most of the old .303s over to .308 since they were their rifles and could do whatever they pleased with them, just as we would convert a Mauser k98K or a Springfield 1903A1 action to some other calibre.
Sorry you are wrong about conversions from .303 to .308. The rifles were purposefully built as .308's from the beginning starting in 1962.
Old 09-08-2010, 07:26 AM
docco's Avatar
docco docco is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SE QLD Australia
Posts: 150
Thanks: 63
Thanked 88 Times in 46 Posts
Default

Few things I have learnt:

Ishapores were purpose built for 7.62 nato
Ishapores do not come in a no.4 receiver so no ladder sight just the front blades
Ishapores hold an extra round or 2 in the magazine
Ishapores break extractor springs
There is no documented cases of Ishapore receivers breaking or stretching from using .308 win

Apart from the better ballistics of the 308 over the 303 the biggest advantage I can see is rim lock. If you plan on using an enfield for some sort of battle / survival rifle the biggest Issue I have found with mine is the stripper clips having to be loaded carefully and held securely

If they bounce around when you are moving the rims can get out of order in the stripper clips (they have to be loaded on over the top of the other) and when you load one with a misaligned rim it will jam the rifle when you try to load it and its a pain to unjam in a hurry. with a rimless cartridge this is not an issue.

I think the best option would be a proof tested no.4 action with a .308 barrel since then you get ladder sights and you can mount a scout scope so you dont block off the charger bridge and retain backup irons.
Old 09-08-2010, 03:55 PM
Langenator Langenator is offline
Fortuna Fortis Paratus
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Bragg, NC
Posts: 102
Thanks: 15
Thanked 75 Times in 35 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orion5457 View Post
The IZZY is based on the No1 Mk III rifle....The hardest thing I find is getting parts. Magazines are a bear right now. My Izzy has the original mag and it really doesn't like feeding the rt side round all that much.
Curio & Relic terminology pointer: IZZY is arifle made at the Izhevsk arsenal in Russia. An Ishapore Lee-Enfield is an ISHY.


Quote:
Also the 2A is less accurate than the 2A1...the 2A used the 303 (2000 yard rear sight) sights, and the 2A1 had the sights changed to work with the 308 (800 yard rear sight). Otherwise no other difference between the 2A and the 2A1.
The ranges for the sights has nothing to do with the accuracy of the rifles, and everything to do with the tactics employed at the time they were built. The 2000 meter sight is a volley fire sight...for entire units firing en masse to suppress or harass distant targets. By the time the 7.62x51 NATO version came about, this tactic was no longer used, so there was no need for the 2000 sight. 800 meters would be pretty much the realistic limits for aimed fire with iron sights, for either caliber.
Old 09-10-2010, 12:57 PM
SeekHer's Avatar
SeekHer SeekHer is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 7,097
Thanks: 28
Thanked 4,911 Times in 2,942 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Pete View Post
Sorry you are wrong about conversions from .303 to .308. The rifles were purposefully built as .308's from the beginning starting in 1962.
Let’s see, they take an existing SMLE—wood, action and sights, replace the barrel with one chambered in 7.62x51mm instead of 7.7x57Rmm, change the bolt face to accept a rimless cartridge and stick a square 12 round stripper clip fed magazine under the now newly hardened receivers and that is a purpose built rifle? Sorry, that is a modified to fire another calibre rifle same as what lots of shooters have done to the k98K, 1903A3 and SMLE…The difference between the two models is in the rear sights; 2A has the original SMLE 2000M sights and the 2A1 has the new 800M sights…Had they built a new receiver, short stroke to compensate for the 3.075 vs. 2.810 OAL of the cartridge then I’d be agreeing with you.


Excerpt from Article :
Quote:
Ishapore Arsenal Rifles 2A and 2A1 in 7.62x51 mm
By: Robert J. Summerhill, 2004

The matter of the fact is that the armory at Ishapore, India did extensive testing of the rifle that would become the model 2A and the 2A1. Why these rifles came into existence was a matter of necessity. The ex-commonwealth of Brittan wanted to join the NATO alliance and use the new standard round for combat, the 7.62 x 51 mm round. Half of the free world was using the newly adopted rifle the FAL and the English variant, the L1A1. These rifles were being manufactured and adopted around the Free World during this time India was having major problems with its neighbors, Pakistan. Many bloody skirmishes were playing out along India’s vast borders. Ramping up with the new FAL rifle was just not possible due to tooling and manufacturing processing limitations at the Ishapore and Dum Dum arsenals. What these arsenals could do, and do very well was to make the tried and true No.1 Mark III type rifle in this newly adopted caliber. Testing of the SMLE’s standard type receiver soon proved to it be too soft allowing stretching and bolt locking. The engineers decided to start from ground zero and redesign the rifle as a new variant of the latter rifle. First off the receiver’s steel was up graded to Chrome Vanadium and hardened to a higher degree than previous rifles. The bolt head and extractor was reshaped to take a rimless cartridge and changes to the rifles stock and sights were made. A special barrel was designed to provide the best accuracy for a bolt action rifle in this caliber. A new trigger guard and a special 12 shot magazine was developed for these rifles. Why the Indian arsenals did not use the FAL type magazine is a question still left unanswered. Extensive testing of these rifles was undertaken and the results showed the rifles were strong, reliable, and accurate out to 800 yards and further. These rifles soon proved themselves with the firefights against the Chinese and the Pakistanis along with other warring factions the Indian Army had to deal with along its borders.
It is the same action (hardened), same bolt (new face), same wood (barrel channel), same sights (excluding 2A1 rear), same sling mounts and Hell even the same bayonet and you're saying it’s a totally different gun? Nope.
Old 09-10-2010, 04:14 PM
Texas Pete Texas Pete is offline
This is a great survival forum
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Garland, TX
Posts: 7,437
Thanks: 1,703
Thanked 5,343 Times in 2,895 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeekHer View Post
Let’s see, they take an existing SMLE—wood, action and sights, replace the barrel with one chambered in 7.62x51mm instead of 7.7x57Rmm, change the bolt face to accept a rimless cartridge and stick a square 12 round stripper clip fed magazine under the now newly hardened receivers and that is a purpose built rifle? Sorry, that is a modified to fire another calibre rifle same as what lots of shooters have done to the k98K, 1903A3 and SMLE…The difference between the two models is in the rear sights; 2A has the original SMLE 2000M sights and the 2A1 has the new 800M sights…Had they built a new receiver, short stroke to compensate for the 3.075 vs. 2.810 OAL of the cartridge then I’d be agreeing with you.


Excerpt from Article :


It is the same action (hardened), same bolt (new face), same wood (barrel channel), same sights (excluding 2A1 rear), same sling mounts and Hell even the same bayonet and you're saying it’s a totally different gun? Nope.
From Your own Reference:

Testing of the SMLE’s standard type receiver soon proved to it be too soft allowing stretching and bolt locking. The engineers decided to start from ground zero and redesign the rifle as a new variant of the latter rifle. First off the receiver’s steel was up graded to Chrome Vanadium and hardened to a higher degree than previous rifles. The bolt head and extractor was reshaped to take a rimless cartridge and changes to the rifles stock and sights were made. A special barrel was designed to provide the best accuracy for a bolt action rifle in this caliber. A new trigger guard and a special 12 shot magazine was developed for these rifles.

They may have the same action design but the rifles were not made from exsisting .303 SMLE's. EACH Rifle was made from the ground up with a different Receiver, Bolt, Barrel and magazine well and magazine. They even used a different steel to manufacture this rifle.

So they are not re-barrelled and re-bolted examples of .303 SMLE's they were a new rifle based on the old design.

Please try both reading and comprehending your sources.
Old 09-10-2010, 08:48 PM
SeekHer's Avatar
SeekHer SeekHer is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 7,097
Thanks: 28
Thanked 4,911 Times in 2,942 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Pete View Post
From Your own Reference:

[B][COLOR=red]They may have the same action design but the rifles were not made from exsisting .303 SMLE's. EACH Rifle was made from the ground up with a different Receiver, Bolt, Barrel and magazine well and magazine. They even used a different steel to manufacture this rifle.

So they are not re-barrelled and re-bolted examples of .303 SMLE's they were a new rifle based on the old design...

Please try both reading and comprehending your sources.
Matter of fact they did re-use the bolts, small furniture, wood stocks and sights but they did not change the action, they used the same moulds, same cutting pattern for the stocks and for the same sized bolt (with different claws)--a .303 Brit action that takes 7.62mm NATO shells and that had new bottom metal installed for a new magazine...Whoop-de-doo!

They'd been making the same gun there for decades so why change a superb design--they toughened up the steel (CroVan) and tempered it differently but it is the same overall dimensions as the first .303s made from 1902...The same thing happened, by the way, to the Nbr.1--new action, rear sight and barrel when they switched to cordite and with various changes to the Nbr. 2 between the wars from 1924 to 1939...it is not anything new to SMLE collectors...They also changed steels a few times during the course of its history as or when new and better steels came about and when new and better gun powders came about...They also had rolled parts and stamped parts due to wartime needs...BUT THEY ARE THE SAME RIFLES...Ok, maybe with or without a magazine cutoff, different barrel and wood lengths and different sights but the same gun for 80+ years...What of the ones that were converted to .22 LR trainers that I learned on in Cadets.


Put a 2A against a 1/3 minus the mags and and mounting bayonets and then tell me it's a new rifle.

The Ishapore wasn't the only official, national, 7.62mm NATO version...The L8 (A1, A2, A3, A4 & A5), L39A1, L42A1 Enforcer and the Envoy were developed. These are Nbr. 4 receivers with 7.62 barrels installed and of course new claws on the bolt face, originally with full wood but later versions the forestocks were cutback.

From Enfield Pages:
While the No 4 rifle was adopted in 1939 the production of No1 Mk III and Mk.III* continued until well after WWII, Lithgow in Australia ceased production in 1963, and it is reported that the Ishapore factory in India continued production until 1987. Changes in metallurgy and manufacturing continued in both countries and resulted in other variations of the MkIII. Lithgow produced a series of heavy barreled rifles as well as some trial shortened and lightened rifles. Ishapore produced a .410 shotgun based on the Mk III action, the 2A and 2A1 versions in 7.62x51mm, as well as some trial shortened and lightened rifles.

Mauser changed its steel and its calibres but everything else remained the same and they are called k98Ks...The Springfield changed between the 1901A1 and A3 but only in stock design and some minor cosmetic changes...The barrel and action metallurgy was changed prior to WW2 to take the higher pressures of the newer powders but they're still Springfields.

If it kinda like looks like a duck, waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck and not a Gyrojet Signal flare!

What would you call these then

SMLE Nbr.1 Mk5 in 7.62x39mm using AK mags made by AIA


SMLE using .45 ACP mags similar to the silenced DeLisle carbine by Special Interest ARMS also in .50 AE and .45/70 Gov.

As to my comprehensive skills, ingest fecal matter!
Old 09-11-2010, 05:39 PM
Texas Pete Texas Pete is offline
This is a great survival forum
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Garland, TX
Posts: 7,437
Thanks: 1,703
Thanked 5,343 Times in 2,895 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeekHer View Post
Matter of fact they did re-use the bolts, small furniture, wood stocks and sights but they did not change the action, they used the same moulds, same cutting pattern for the stocks and for the same sized bolt (with different claws)--a .303 Brit action that takes 7.62mm NATO shells and that had new bottom metal installed for a new magazine...Whoop-de-doo!

They'd been making the same gun there for decades so why change a superb design--they toughened up the steel (CroVan) and tempered it differently but it is the same overall dimensions as the first .303s made from 1902...The same thing happened, by the way, to the Nbr.1--new action, rear sight and barrel when they switched to cordite and with various changes to the Nbr. 2 between the wars from 1924 to 1939...it is not anything new to SMLE collectors...They also changed steels a few times during the course of its history as or when new and better steels came about and when new and better gun powders came about...They also had rolled parts and stamped parts due to wartime needs...BUT THEY ARE THE SAME RIFLES...Ok, maybe with or without a magazine cutoff, different barrel and wood lengths and different sights but the same gun for 80+ years...What of the ones that were converted to .22 LR trainers that I learned on in Cadets.


Put a 2A against a 1/3 minus the mags and and mounting bayonets and then tell me it's a new rifle.

The Ishapore wasn't the only official, national, 7.62mm NATO version...The L8 (A1, A2, A3, A4 & A5), L39A1, L42A1 Enforcer and the Envoy were developed. These are Nbr. 4 receivers with 7.62 barrels installed and of course new claws on the bolt face, originally with full wood but later versions the forestocks were cutback.

From Enfield Pages:
While the No 4 rifle was adopted in 1939 the production of No1 Mk III and Mk.III* continued until well after WWII, Lithgow in Australia ceased production in 1963, and it is reported that the Ishapore factory in India continued production until 1987. Changes in metallurgy and manufacturing continued in both countries and resulted in other variations of the MkIII. Lithgow produced a series of heavy barreled rifles as well as some trial shortened and lightened rifles. Ishapore produced a .410 shotgun based on the Mk III action, the 2A and 2A1 versions in 7.62x51mm, as well as some trial shortened and lightened rifles.

Mauser changed its steel and its calibres but everything else remained the same and they are called k98Ks...The Springfield changed between the 1901A1 and A3 but only in stock design and some minor cosmetic changes...The barrel and action metallurgy was changed prior to WW2 to take the higher pressures of the newer powders but they're still Springfields.

If it kinda like looks like a duck, waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck and not a Gyrojet Signal flare!

What would you call these then

SMLE Nbr.1 Mk5 in 7.62x39mm using AK mags made by AIA


SMLE using .45 ACP mags similar to the silenced DeLisle carbine by Special Interest ARMS also in .50 AE and .45/70 Gov.

As to my comprehensive skills, ingest fecal matter!
The link you provided describes all the things they did and it wa snot merely stripping a SMLE receiver and adding a new barrel, re-shaped bolt (wht ever that is I don't think it is original to the .303 version).

YOUR source says the steel was different in the reciever and everything. I could care less if it is visually identical and the design is the same the gun was made with newly engineered parts and metals it is a whole new rifle that looks in appearance and design the same as the SMLE .303.

I never said it was redesigned (why re-invent the wheel when you have an execlent design to begin with).

The photos of the .45 SMLE and 7.62X39 SMLE's were old enfields they slapped together for different chamberings. I am not sure who built them but thay re not the same animal as the the Ishapore Arsonel SMLE 2A.

The pics you posted are either Gibbs Rifles or Century Arms Rifles (I know Gibbs made rebarreled .45-70 Enfields and also .410 Shotgun Enfields.

The Ishapore Arsonel .308 SMLEs always lived their complete service life as a .308 they were never anotehr caliber before. They were manufactured as .308.
Old 09-25-2011, 11:40 AM
reverendg reverendg is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,107
Thanks: 998
Thanked 1,699 Times in 835 Posts
Default

Also, the .308 is not a hotter round than the 7.62x51 NATO. This is popular myth. The calibers share external dimensions, though internally the 7.62 has less capacity. Once the units of pressure measurement (piezo vs CUP) are converted they also are designed for the same pressures.
The primary difference in the two chamberings is the acceptable dimensions of the chamber itself. The .308 has tighter specifications, such that a .308 casing may stretch excessively in a looser 7.62 chamber, and rupture. The thicker casings of the 7.62 protect against this occurring while still allowing feeding reliability in a military weapon.
The Following User Says Thank You to reverendg For This Useful Post:
Old 10-14-2011, 02:47 AM
Bohdi Bohdi is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: CA, USA.
Posts: 14
Thanks: 22
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Mine feeds, points, and shoots well. The bolt action's smooth and fast, shoots 10+1 nicely. I need to buy more magazines and spare parts, just in case. A real keeper.

Looking for a scope mount and scope, for fast shooting at 50 and 100 yards....
Old 10-14-2011, 08:51 AM
jack the cat jack the cat is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 16
Thanks: 28
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default seconded.

absolutely, but tough on the shoulder....
Old 10-14-2011, 10:23 AM
joshiedoom's Avatar
joshiedoom joshiedoom is offline
Trapper
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 805
Thanks: 984
Thanked 604 Times in 314 Posts
Default

Way to make a zombie out of this thread, but I love my 2a1. It is my favorite enfield that I have restored so far.ALSO. 308 does shoot fine out of these. I checked the casings after I found out about 7.62 only....

Good quality wood and metal under all that black gunk!

Reply

Bookmarks



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Kevin Felts 2006 - 2012,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net


This site is Gunny Approved