LumberJocks

All Replies on Type 2 Sargent frog replacement question

  • Advertise with us
View luthierwnc's profile

Type 2 Sargent frog replacement question

by luthierwnc
posted 02-03-2017 11:34 PM


1 2 next »
51 replies

51 replies so far

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#1 posted 02-04-2017 12:35 AM

Wow, that IS TOUGH. I’d help but only have one #5418 in my collection. Good luck in hunting. FWIW, it sure seems to be much tougher to find deals since I started pumping Sargents on LJs (and yes many have/are telling me so). Sorry.

Keep the faith…

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#2 posted 02-04-2017 02:42 AM

Thanks! Your site has been a big help. That’s how I know to expect (won’t know til it gets here) thinner iron on the bottom than later versions. Except for less iron at the mouth, the underside of the frogs look compatible. I won’t make any decisions until I have it in hand. When it arrives I’ll post a couple shots for the archives.

You may not be driving prices as high as your detractors claim. I got this for eleven bucks—possibly because it was listed as a Stanley 418 because of a replacement blade. The bottom 2/3 of the tote is definitely rosewood. The top third might have been in the same collision that took-out the back of the frog. I hope the guy didn’t say what I would have.

I got a VBM 414 a couple years ago that also had a Stanley iron. I had to file the screw slot a touch wider to keep the ball end of the lateral from binding. A five-minute job but it wasn’t a drop-in replacement.

Cheers, sh

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#3 posted 02-05-2017 03:26 PM

the type 2 amd 3 frogs were the same. I guess you can see enough of the top to identify it as a type 2. I didn’t look close enough. The type 3 will work however.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#4 posted 02-05-2017 03:27 PM

.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#5 posted 02-05-2017 04:47 PM

Skip,
Can you confirm a couple of things (or add images) to help us…
  • Is the brass adjuster nut pure brass, or does it have a steel insert?
  • Are the frog nuts on the base square or round?

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#6 posted 02-05-2017 06:00 PM

Thanks Gents!

I ordered the Type 3 frog on Ebay figuring I’d rather have it and have to sell it than wait forever for another to surface. The plane is due Monday or Tuesday so all I have to go on right now are the pictures from the auction. There isn’t a rear-view of the adjuster nut. I’m sorta going on the overall arch of the frog in the shot I included. Except for the width, it’s a dead-ringer for the T2 in both or your comparisons. The horseshoe indentation is shallow and smooth. The angled supports to either side of the lateral adjustment area have parallel sides and appear to end unbroken at the original line of the arch.

That said, the frog I just ordered (shown below) has elements of several models. It has a folded lateral but it also has a center support between the two screws. My guess is that Sargent was constantly fiddling with the design and marketed new generations based on the base. It’s just a guess.

More news when I get it, sh

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#7 posted 02-05-2017 06:09 PM

That’s a type4 frog.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#8 posted 02-05-2017 06:39 PM

Skip,
Here are a few images of my #5418. I have not gotten around to refurb it yet, so it is still in the rust state.

BTW, I have found that only my smaller 5400-series planes had round frog posts (2-5408, 1-5409) and my larger all have square frog posts (1-5410, 2-5414, 1-5418). I wonder if that holds true with others out there… Hmm…

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#9 posted 02-05-2017 07:51 PM

Don; oh, well. I’d thought the Type 4’s were the VBM’s with a smooth surface. I have two of those and neither have the stippled-detail in the recesses.

Mike; looks like yours has a date with the electrolysis tank. It can be hard to orient the parts so all of the surfaces get the line-of-sight exposure to the scrap iron. On the one in the mail; it looks like enough of the Japanning is left not to repaint but that’s a game-day decision. With luck, I have enough Brazilian bits to laminate a new tote top. I love the smell of that wood but it is unobtainium in quantity for good reasons.

As long as it fits … sh

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#10 posted 02-05-2017 08:50 PM

Yeah, the 418 fits in the 16gal tub. The 422 and 424 are actually too big with my setup… ;-(

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#11 posted 02-05-2017 09:06 PM

Mine is just a plastic tub about 2’ x 16” by maybe 12” high. I wired pieces of rebar in each of the corners with Romex and attached a chunk of channel iron that’s around 16” long by 3” against one of the long sides. Then I just string all of the parts together with baling wire and rearrange them every few hours trying to get a direct line to one of the anodes. A car battery charger supplies the juice and I leave it on the middle setting. Water and washing soda. I made a little basket out of perforated steel for the screws and attach it to the cathode.

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#12 posted 02-09-2017 10:29 PM

The 5418 showed this afternoon. Getting here from Oregon took longer than the replacement frog so everything is ready to go. Overall; I’m pleased. The base is indeed corrugated and dead flat. You can’t expect that—especially on a plane this long—but that saves a lot of work. Japanning; 50% but no rust so I won’t repaint it. All of the little parts are clean too.

This is definitely the thin-cast base. The replacement frog dropped right in. I’d forgotten there is a gap between the edge of the frog and the bed on these Sargents. I checked another one to be sure. The Stanley replacement iron has probably never been used on this plane. As usual, the slot is too narrow to fit the disc at the end of the lateral and it was bolted to the chipbreaker upside down. Strangely, it is well-honed so at some point, somebody knew what they were doing. I’ll order a Hock tonight.

One thing I hadn’t anticipated was that with the tote so close to the frog on these old ones, the tote has to be shorter than even a stock 414 to clear the lateral. I had a piece of Brazilian 1.1” x .42” x 8” that might have made a nice bridge for a small guitar but for a wormhole in the wrong place. I cut that in unequal thirds and laminated them together with just enough to spare for the top quarter of the tote.

Give me a few days to report back. My next woodworking project will be chainsawing a tree that fell on my fence last night. The top-rail has a nice “U” shape now.

Cheers, sh

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#13 posted 02-11-2017 01:54 PM

Got the tote done. The horn is more in the style of the later 409’s but it works and the laminate seams don’t show too much. I’ve had good luck with two coats of shellac followed by two thin coats of Tru Oil. It looks like honest use—neither shiny nor worn-away.

Just waiting on the new blade. sh

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#14 posted 02-13-2017 12:23 AM

Here you go, I got around to re-furbing my 5418. This one one was rather beat up and needed much TLC, but it lives… ;-) :

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#15 posted 02-13-2017 12:24 AM

I’m not sure about the Sargent. The Harley distracted me.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#16 posted 02-13-2017 01:11 AM

I’m going to keep the original Japanning for now. My usual policy is to only repaint when the finish has rusted off. In this case, the metal looks clean.

The new iron ought to be here mid-week. I didn’t get a matching cap-iron this time. I’ve got the Grizzly version of a Tormek and I’ve found that if you use the horizontal blade fixture as close as you can get it to the stone, it does a pretty good job of leveling where the cap-iron meets the blade.

I did try the blade and cap from a Sargent VBM 410 and that worked OK—although I couldn’t get the edge right up against the front of the mouth for really fine shavings. For a fore plane that’s probably not a deal-breaker. Some of that might be the thinner 45-degree casting behind the mouth means the frog has to be up further. Clipping the back off some spare frog washers might get me another millimeter and the new thicker blade will help too. Then, there’s always the chainsaw file.

On Saturday I hardened the plane blades for some infill projects. The forge is just a paint can lined with plaster and sand but with two MAP torches, it will get hot enough for O1 steel. I’ll temper them in the next few days and see how they work.

Cheers and good luck with your projects, sh

View corelz125's profile

corelz125

858 posts in 1488 days


#17 posted 02-13-2017 02:58 AM

That’s all you do is heat them in the can and let it cool on its own to harden them?

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#18 posted 02-13-2017 12:47 PM



That s all you do is heat them in the can and let it cool on its own to harden them?

- corelz125

You heat it then quench it in oil.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View corelz125's profile

corelz125

858 posts in 1488 days


#19 posted 02-13-2017 03:06 PM

Don the old stanley irons come out good? are you knee deep in snow ?

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#20 posted 02-13-2017 04:16 PM



Don the old stanley irons come out good? are you knee deep in snow ?

- corelz125

Fantastic.

More like waste deep, but it’s winter in the NE!

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#21 posted 02-13-2017 06:02 PM

O1 is the only steel I mess with because it is the easiest to work with primitive equipment. I heat it in the little forge orange-red (approx 1450 degrees Fahrenheit) and immediately quench it in a pail of warm cooking oil. That makes it really hard but brittle. Since I’m using 3/16” stock, I can only get the first inch or so hot enough. The rest of the blade remains annealed which is fine.

After it cools down, I wire-wheel the scale off (done right that’s not much), throw it in the oven at 375 for an hour and let it cool down. Theoretically that should give me a temper around 60C on the Rockwell hardness scale. Not as hard as commercially made irons but good enough. It works.

A couple things I’ve picked up: do your fabrication work while it’s soft but don’t put much of an edge on the blade. It will get too hot relative to the thicker parts. Another is to allow for the smell of the quench. Soybean oil just smells like movie popcorn but if you are using motor oil, the shop will reek like you blew a head-gasket.

That’s about it. The Hock blade for the Sargent should arrive today. sh

View corelz125's profile

corelz125

858 posts in 1488 days


#22 posted 02-13-2017 06:42 PM

never thought about cooking oil always think of motor oil. oxy/acetylene torch will work?

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#23 posted 02-13-2017 10:08 PM

corelz125: That will work fine as long as you keep things moving to distribute the heat as evenly as possible. That’s where the little forge comes in handy. You can stack four kiln bricks up to do the same thing.

YouTube is full of low and medium-tech tempering ideas thanks to a crop of modern knife makers. For the guys who work with air-cooled steels, the temperature treatment both up and down is much more controlled. If you really want to get into the weeds, check out the powdered metal alloys like Veritas uses for their PM-V11 plane blades.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb9iqhPP9I0

No melting and reforming. The machine sweeps fine steel particles into the press, crushes it under hundreds of tons of pressure and out pops a fully-dimensioned part.

View corelz125's profile

corelz125

858 posts in 1488 days


#24 posted 02-14-2017 02:47 AM

Very interesting I’ll check some of the videos out. Thanks for the info

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#25 posted 02-14-2017 09:08 PM

BTW, While refurbing the 5418 above(post #14), I noticed that the cutter/blade had already been tip-hardened at the factory. I assume that because of the overall oxidation of both parts of the blade show quite a bit of age/oxidation. Interesting topic…

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#26 posted 02-14-2017 09:54 PM

Is that tip hardened or forge welded together?

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#27 posted 02-15-2017 01:03 AM

Don,
I do not know. Here is my best image of the side of the blade. Is that a weld?

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#28 posted 02-15-2017 10:58 AM

Looks like only the business-end of the blade was hardened. Laminated blades usually have a strip of high-carbon steel squished into a ledge on the soft steel so you get a broader bonding surface. The weld would also show as a line along the edge. Tools from Japan sells a plane blade made like that:

http://www.toolsfromjapan.com/store/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=339_514_546

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#29 posted 02-15-2017 12:04 PM

https://www.google.com/amp/s/paulsellers.com/2015/05/laminated-stanley-plane-irons-n-more/amp/

I’ve read others before.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#30 posted 02-15-2017 12:29 PM

All I can say is that looking at this blade with my eyes (not camera image), the edge of the blade shows a definite vertical line at 90* to the length of the blade.

You can almost just make that edge line out above, near the lint fiber. That said, IMO this appears to be a forge weld. When looking at the first two images, they are mirror images of each other. I don’t see how a laminate would/could do that.

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#31 posted 02-15-2017 12:48 PM

I honestly thought all Vintage blades were forge welded. I never really researched it.

It might be something worth looking into.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#32 posted 02-15-2017 12:51 PM

I also think that sometimes”forge welded” and “laminated” gets used meaning the same thing, which of course is incorrect.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#33 posted 02-15-2017 05:03 PM

Cheat! Discretely scuff it with a grinder on both ends. On good steel; you should get a shower of sparks that look like lightning. On cheap steel; much less so. If you get the same kind of sparks on either end, I’d suspect only the edge end was hardened and tempered. If the sparks are different, you probably have different steels.

Back in the day, tool steels were so hard to make that it was worth the effort to hammer small chunks into mill-run blanks. Nowadays, it wouldn’t be cost effective to laminate high-carbon or alloy steels onto low-carbon blanks because of the extra machining and labor involved. The Tsuneboro blades are an exception but they don’t dominate the market.

A hundred years ago, good steel could be made in quantity. My guess is that those blades came out of the thickness rollers red hot, were immediately stamped for the screw slot and outline then quenched. Then they would be reheated to temper before finishing. Very little hand-work. It’s just a guess but other than the grade of steel, it’s no different than making shovels.

Hope it helps! I got the Hock blade and widened the slot with an angle grinder. I’ll see if I can’t put an edge on it and post some shavings porn by the weekend. sh

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#34 posted 02-15-2017 07:43 PM

You will love the Hock blade. I put that on my owned forever Pre-VBM 418 and it makes a great user.

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#35 posted 02-16-2017 12:00 AM

Thanks Mike, I have several already and some Veritas blades too. This really is a golden age of tool making. sh

View corelz125's profile

corelz125

858 posts in 1488 days


#36 posted 02-17-2017 12:36 AM

How are the veritas blades compared to the hock?

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#37 posted 02-17-2017 02:47 AM

I really don’t have a preference. You can get chapter and verse over at Sawmill Creek. That said; I’ve never tried either of their air-cooled (A2) steels. I’ve always gotten the O1 carbon steel from Hock and the powdered-metal (PM-V11) steel from Veritas. The Veritas bench plane blades are a little thicker but I have a Hock rabbet blade for my No 10 1/2 that is thicker still. The alloys are supposed to stay sharp longer than carbon-steel but I never plane anything long enough to care.

There are a couple things that make either of these (or the Isles or Cosman blades) different than the old Stanleys. One is that they can come with a matching chip-breaker that is machined to stay flat across the width of the edge. You don’t have to get them but I’d consider it a system. They aren’t just a sheet of cheap steel bent to fit. The combination of that and the heavier blade helps keep it from buckling on the frog and chattering in heavy cuts.

The other difference is that they come well flattened on the back. No Geppetto-like labor trying to get that side good. It could be shinier but it doesn’t take long. Touch it up on the fine stones and go. There are times when the blade is so much thicker than the original that you have to file the front of the mouth. No big deal to me but I’m not vying for a centerfold in “Plane Beautiful” either.

Either way, you’ll like it.

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#38 posted 02-17-2017 12:53 PM

On my #418 w/Hock I have NOT added the Hock chipper (yet). I suspect, but not sure, that my pre-VBM lever cap screw (proprietary thread) may not be long enough to accommodate both the blade AND chipper. Any idea on just how long the lever cap screw needs to be on these older Sargents in order to allow them to use both?

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#39 posted 02-17-2017 01:08 PM

I’ve seen this conversation before. I think Hock will send a screw for the combo. I’m not sure if it is an extra charge, but I doubt it would be much.

I believe (and have written before) that upgrading the chip breaker will do more for performance than the iron (assuming the iron is good)

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#40 posted 02-17-2017 06:40 PM

The Hock combo (and I think the just the breaker) comes with a screw. I’ve mixed and matched blades and breakers and there has always been enough room if you pinch them together a little before seating the screw. If there wasn’t, I’m not above filing the underside of the screw head a little.

Since that’s a 19th century thread pitch, I just use a 3/8-16 screw for the ones I make from scratch or have to chase the threads for a screw I can find. Obviously not for heirlooms like yours but good on a Friday afternoon.

https://www.mcmaster.com/#91792a619/=16ea4oz

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#41 posted 02-17-2017 07:25 PM

Don,
Looks like I will have to re-tap the lever cap screw hole if I want to go with a Hock chipper then. If I am ONLY going to be putting the Hock Chipper on my PreVBM #418, then it is probably worth it.

I just went out and checked some measurements. The drill tap hole is 7/32in as measured by my sticking a 7/32 (0.21875in.) drill bit in the hole. And the average (of 6-checked) of the lever cap screw body diameter is 0.2677in. (L=.2645 & H=.2715). SO there is no going back since the 9/32in completely eliminates the OEM screw by size.

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#42 posted 02-17-2017 08:16 PM

I wonder if Ron knows that. It might be worth an email to him. Maybe he’d throw some longer ones in his line up. It would mean another potential growing market for.him.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#43 posted 02-17-2017 09:14 PM



I wonder if Ron knows that. It might be worth an email to him. Maybe he d throw some longer ones in his line up. It would mean another potential growing market for.him.
- Don W

I probably will in a bit. I am still trying to find an old sized tap&die for this (~.2690in—24pitch), may have been called a 16-24. Have NOT found any old references. Everything I can find says a #16 has a 20 pitch max. I stand here with a pitch gauge and micrometer in hand, and know that this is different, but…....... 8-(

BTW, I did find the 14-24 T&D set a few years back(for the tote and knobs) out of Yugoslavia, but can’t remember the retail outlet stateside. FWIW, still have to “slim” down U.S. steel stock before trying to use the Die. Just too tight.

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

View corelz125's profile

corelz125

858 posts in 1488 days


#44 posted 02-17-2017 10:22 PM

Don the hock chip breaker would be a big improvement on a type 9 or 10 bailey or type 5 bedrock?

View Don W's profile

Don W

19341 posts in 3080 days


#45 posted 02-18-2017 12:08 AM



Don the hock chip breaker would be a big improvement on a type 9 or 10 bailey or type 5 bedrock?

- corelz125

It’s hard to say. It.depends on a lot of things. It may not need help, but you may notice a difference if your plane is not tuned perfect.

-- http://timetestedtools.net - Collecting is an investment in the past, and the future.

View corelz125's profile

corelz125

858 posts in 1488 days


#46 posted 02-18-2017 02:26 AM

Trying to get there to a perfectly tuned plane.

View luthierwnc's profile

luthierwnc

150 posts in 2288 days


#47 posted 02-18-2017 03:15 AM

For an extra $25 you have a known-good component.

But that’s one of the last things you do. First, the bottom has to be flat. The plane I started this thread about came in perfect shape but a hundred years of life can warp them if they were even flat to begin with. I get the blue 60-grit belts for my small (6×48) belt sander and abuse them fairly close. Then I cut some finer grit belts and stretch them taught across my out-feed table to finish the job. It’s tedious. Wear a particle mask.

A flat blade needs a flat frog bed. What matters more is that the frog seats so the bed is perpendicular to the sides. I spent an hour fiddling with a frog learning that. It seated solidly but one side was slightly longer then the other. Five minutes with a file solved that. I won’t share what I said at the moment of discovery.

The front of the mouth should be dead square, level across and crisp. Wait till you get the blade to do that. There is a Rob Cosman video on filing them. The mouth is the most important chip-breaker for close, fine shavings. They can get pretty chewed-up over time. That might be why these new-fangled replacement blades are more important now. The leading edge of the mouth keeps getting filed further away so the frog gets advanced farther from the support casting on the other side. That’s where a thin blade needs the most bolstering and it’s not there. It flexes and you keep sharpening it thinking that will help.

A plane in rough (but salvageable) shape can take a long time to fettle. It’s worth it. Good luck, sh

View bandit571's profile

bandit571

23801 posts in 3195 days


#48 posted 02-18-2017 03:21 AM

Have to watch out when going to those thicker irons AND chipbreakers…...not so much the fit at the mouth opening (it won’t, so you file away metal) it lies in that little, worn down a bit tab, at the end of the yoke. The tab that is supposed to make the adjustments for depth. Sometimes, the tab is just plain too short to go through the thicker iron and then engage the chipbreakers slot. Or, it it does by chance reach that for….it a change in depth is great enough, the tab will just drop out of the slot.

Just a heads up…..

-- A Planer? I'M the planer, this is what I use

View corelz125's profile

corelz125

858 posts in 1488 days


#49 posted 02-18-2017 03:25 AM

Got the sole flattening down pretty good. Have a piece of granite counter top and 60 grit psa. I will take a look at the video can use more knowledge on the frog and mouth set up

View HorizontalMike's profile

HorizontalMike

7797 posts in 3426 days


#50 posted 02-18-2017 12:26 PM



Have to watch out when going to those thicker irons AND chipbreakers…...not so much the fit at the mouth opening (it won t, so you file away metal) it lies in that little, worn down a bit tab, at the end of the yoke. The tab that is supposed to make the adjustments for depth. Sometimes, the tab is just plain too short to go through the thicker iron and then engage the chipbreakers slot. Or, it it does by chance reach that for….it a change in depth is great enough, the tab will just drop out of the slot.
Just a heads up…..
- bandit571

Yeah, I have had some really worn tabs on frogs. I am wondering out loud IF one could actually use a bit of JB-Weld to build the tab up? And wonder IF that would be strong enough to actually work…? Hmm…

-- HorizontalMike -- "Woodpeckers understand..."

Have your say...

You must be signed in to reply.

1 2 next »
51 replies


DISCLAIMER: Any posts on LJ are posted by individuals acting in their own right and do not necessarily reflect the views of LJ. LJ will not be held liable for the actions of any user.

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

HomeRefurbers.com