Does Weight Matter On A Mountain Bike? | Lightweight Vs Heavy MTB

Does Weight Matter On A Mountain Bike? | Lightweight Vs Heavy MTB

– Now there’s long been
a push in the market for sort of lighter and lighter bikes, and known to be pedaling a tank uphill, but can actually that
heavier bike play any benefit when going back down? Well so today we’re going
to have a little look, by adding weights and doing
a few tests to the bike to see what a light
bike versus a heavy bike is like out on the trial. (upbeat music) Is like I’m riding on a waterbed. (upbeat music) So before we dive in today,
let’s do some jargon busting. Now we’re going to be talking about sprung and unsprung weight. Both of these are really going to affect how your bike performs,
especially the suspension. But what the heck are they? Let’s find out. In a nutshell, the components
that are not affected by the suspension are unsprung,
this includes fork lowers, wheels, tires and rotors. Sprung weight is all the other components that affect the suspension. Now the larger the ratio of
sprung mass to unsprung mass that there is, the more
stable The ride is going to be and the less you’re going to
feel it on those rougher trails. A good example of this is if
you’ve ever been on an e-bike, those sort of extra
batteries and extra weight that are on those, creates
a much more stable ride and sort of seems almost to smooth out the trail a little bit. So we’re going to try and
change the ratio of sprung to unsprung mass to see what
effects it has on the trails by adding weights in different places. But I think it’s time
we went and did that. So let’s get back to the van. (upbeat music) Let’s take a look at today’s setup. Now guys in the past have
experimented with putting weights on there bikes, people like
Chris Porter amongst others. They’ve tried putting weights down low around the bottom bracket
and also high up on the stem. And for the purposes
of today’s experiment, we are going to have a go at both. So to keep things as fair
and simple as possible, we’re going to be using the same bike, I’ve got my reactor here. We’re going to be using
these little weights on our first setup. Now they’re 500 grams a
piece, we’ve got four of them, so it’s an extra two kilos in weight which we’re going to be attaching around the bottom bracket
area and also up near the stem to test out sprung mass. (upbeat music) Now for our second weighted setup, we are going to need
another set of wheels. So let’s see what we can get. Oh perfect, I don’t know
where they came from. So this is our second set of wheels, they are slightly different set of wheels but virtually the same in weight
once the rotors are added. We’ve also kept the tires exactly the same to try and minimize the differences. The only difference is, in these there is about two kilograms
of water across the pair, and that is a lot of extra unsprung mass to be sloshing around
and fill on the trails. It’s going to be really interesting
to see what that’s like. (upbeat music) (water sloshing) It’s a lot of weight, it’s a
lot of water sloshing around. (water sloshing) Should be fun. Now it’s time to get is
all important numbers and do a little bit of weighing, but for that we need a bike. Ah, perfect. (upbeat music) The first weighing is the bike
with no additional weights, it’s completely stopped. So let’s see what we have. (upbeat music) As you can see without
additional weight strapped around the bottom bracket and
stem we’ve added just over the two kilogram mark, including
the straps onto the bike. (upbeat music) Now for our third setup, this
is without weighted wheels. So let’s get her on the
scales and see what it weighs. (upbeat music) So I thought I put two kilos
of water across the wheels. Turns out, I may have
slightly miss-measured and actually got three and
a half kilos of water now, which will just make it more fun I think. Cool, so it is testing time. Now, just to keep things as
fair and even as possible, I’m not changing tire pressures
at all on either wheel set. And also my suspension settings are what I would normally run with, I’m not altering that with
any of the added weight, which would be really interesting. So for test one, we are
doing a breaking challenge. Now I’m going to start on up the hill and coming down at a fair old speed keeping the same speed
each time on my gam in here and we’ve got this little log as our mark, and we’re going to jam
the brakes on there, and I think for each one see
how long it takes a stop, it could be an interesting
experiment I think this one. (upbeat music) Right, so we are dropping in, currently doing 15 mile
an hour, and woohoo. We braked. Little heavy on the front, but we got it. She’s a measure up and see what it was. (upbeat music) Okay, that was actually a
really interesting test. As you can see, I’ve
stopped not a lot further than stock bike if you like, and that is with the
additional sprung weight, and what was really
noticeable actually was the back end didn’t pick
up and the front end didn’t go as light on the heavy braking. So that is actually a really
interesting test for you know, the added weight not much
difference in braking. (upbeat music) Get up speed. Oh, nice. Okay, I would say that buying
on the same as stock bike, maybe even a little bit before. Interesting. I think again, you had
so much weight low down. You really had the grip and the confidence to pull the brakes really
hard, no and the front end wasn’t going to wash out,
and the back end is kind of, although picked up, stayed under control. So very interesting test that one. Yeah, cool. I like it. (upbeat music) The time for our second test, and this is a climbing challenge. So again with all three different setups, so we’re going to start from
where our log finish was for our breaking test
and we’re going to climb by 100 meters up that way
to where the boards are, I think you see them. And really check out
which one is going to be the slowest off the mark
maybe or once it gets going it’s going to be okay,
and I think this one can really throw up some
interesting numbers. (upbeat music) Three, two, one, go. (upbeat music) Woohoo Well, that’s my normal bike, sprinted. Feels pretty good, so I don’t think the mods are going to be able to beat that one. (upbeat music) Three, two, one. (upbeat music) Oh my God, but you can definitely
feel the added weight coming off the line,
just getting it going. Is a big noticeable difference,
but I think we look good. (upbeat music) Okay, all right, final test
time, water in the wheels, is going to be interesting. So they go. All right, three, two, one. Absolute tank off the start. (upbeat music) Oh my Lord, she does not go well off
the line, I’ll give it that. I think we may have
found the Achilles’ heel in unsprung mass, and that
is, it’s hard to get it going. (upbeat music) Woohoo So now it’s time for our
third and final testing out, what I think could be
possibly the most interesting. And that is a real world test. Now we’re here, we’ve got
about a minute downhill run. And we’re going to try all
three of our setups on it, and compare the numbers,
but I think this is where the two different weighted setups could really come into the
run and have sort of had the biggest effect on the ride here. (upbeat music) Woohoo Okay, so I’ve just finished my second run with this is with the weights to make it a higher ratio sort of sprung
and as a noticeable difference going down it feels so much
more planted and steady but on the way back up, I got
to admit, she’s a bit of a dog to get up the hills with the extra weight. (upbeat music) Oh my God. Its like I’m riding on a waterbed. (upbeat music) Oh my God. It feels like I’m riding on. Oh my Lord. I’m going to die. (upbeat music) So that was our final run on
our little downhill course with water in the wheel. So more unsprung weight. And I got to be honest,
it was not very fun. It sounded like I was
riding on a waterbed. And it just felt funny at slow speeds, because the amount of
water, the centrifugal force just made the bike sort of
sway from side to side almost. And it just made it really
hard to maneuver the bike. So I think there might
be something in that if you were to experiment with the amount of liquid in there. But for the purposes of this
test, it was not very fun. (laughing) But we’ve got some good numbers. So I think it’s now time to
throw it back to the shed, crunch some digits and see what we got. So we are back here in the shed and boy did I crunch a lot of numbers. So let’s firstly take
a look at bike weight. Now my stock bike, no
weights on it as you saw it, 14 and a half kilos, when
we strap the weights on just over two kilos extra,
so that was 16 and a half. Now with the water, this
is the biggest increase it’s from 14 and a half kilos, my bike jumped up to a
whopping 18.06 kilograms, so a real big difference in weight though, which I think is going to make
a massive difference climbing that’s for sure. So test one, this was
our braking challenge. Now interestingly bike one
which is my stock bike managed to stop an 18 and a half feet. Bike to which was a
sprung weight was 22 feet. And actually a bike three was 21.5 feet, and that was the bike with
the water in the wheels. With the added weight, it did
give a lot more stability. So the front wheel wasn’t sort of washing the back end was more like controlled and was able to keep it like
almost lower to the ground and get the get on the brakes better. So quite interesting, though I still think if you played around with a weight there you can probably find
a bit of a sweet spot. Test two and this was
our climbing challenge. Now over our set distance on each three, my stock bike climbed in 7.7 seconds, bike number two OUR sprung
that weight was 8.2 seconds, so about 0.5 slower. And I think this was
always going to be a given having a heavier bike. Interestingly bike three,
so our weighted wheels it was again another
0.5 of a second slower. So in total, a whole second
slower over under 10 seconds is quite a big gap. And the reason for that is with such a large rotational master get going, it was just so slow off the
line and to get up to speed. There was just too many forces in there to get it going and get
that water rotating. Once it got up to speed it
was okay but off the line, she was a bit of a dog. So third and finally, our trail challenge. Now we wrote a very
familiar piece of trail, one that I’ve written many times. I thought is about a minute long, it’s actually a little bit shorter, more like around the 42nd mark. But again, bike one smash
at 38 seconds down it. Bike too, so this is a sprung weight again with a weight strapped around the stem and the bottom bracket,
that was 41 seconds. Now the interesting thing here, although it’s three seconds slower, the bike felt a lot more composed and controlled under braking
over rougher sections. So actually it made a
very big difference there. I think having a play
around with how much weight could really sort of find
a sweet spot in that, and I think that could
be the most effective. Bike three, again our
weighted wheels unsprung mass, 46 seconds, very slow. And the reason for that is
on this particular section of trail anyway, it’s not the quickest, so getting up to speed as hard
as we’ve sort of discussed with our climbing challenge,
but also the feel of it, the such a large amount
of water sloshing around in the ties, the forces
that that throws around just made the bike
through actually unstable especially in the air, and
therefore yet 46 seconds. So in total eight seconds slower, which on something that short
is a massive amount of time. Okay, so let’s summarize kind of go through what we’ve learned. Now, my stock bike, I’m very
used to very comfortable on it and no surprising it kind of came out trumps every single time. What was surprising is the sprung weight, which is adding the weights to
the stem and bottom bracket, things like that. I definitely think
there’s something in that. I think if you played
around with positioning and the amount of weight
you could probably, you know, get some definite
benefits from that. So when climbing back up once you’ve done your
downhill runs, I’ll be honest, both unsprung and sprung
additional weight was noticeable. it drags more, you’re just riding up slow, it’s just harder work because you’re carrying
more weight obviously. But the defense I definitely
think that the sprung weight has a lot of potential as obviously a lot of people have tested previously, wherever you play around with how much weight you put on there, then if you’ve got time
delving a little deeper into suspension setup and tire pressures, I think you could really
find an optimal setup. Overall, I probably keep my bike stock, I’m not going to be adding
any weights to it soon because it’s an all day trail bike, had only carrying any additional weight. Thank you for watching this video. I hope you found it helpful. And if you’ve got any comments or if you’ve tried adding
weight to your bike, let us know in the comments, that’d be great to hear. Don’t forget, give us a
thumbs up, click subscribe, and if you want to keep watching GMBN, well just have a click on the videos now.

Only registered users can comment.

  1. The test would be a lot more interesting by just comparing a normal bike with DH tires and alloy wheels to one with lighter tires and carbon rims.

    Also it would be interesting to hear more about the "feel" of the bike. For example a lighter bike (especially wheels and unsprung weight) would potentially feel more playful, more fun in the air, nimble in the corners etc. while a slightly heavier bike might feel more planted and good through the rough stuff and going straight.

  2. Kinda pointless test since your unsprung testing was actually a test about rotational mass and that has a bigger difference than anything. Would have been good if you had a test for rotational mass and the test for unsprung weight was weights added to the fork lowers and chainstays. But good try.

  3. The water in the wheels didn't just increase the overall mass it also increased the angular momentum which would account for the added difficulty in handling.

  4. Come on guys, don't put water in the wheels, that's rotational weight and also unbalanced. Surely putting in the fork legs and chainstays would be a better way to do it.

  5. Explains why ebikes are so stable going downhill and on the air. For normal bikes, unless you don´t mind the extra wheight or you do uplifts it could be beneficial, however, I wouldn´t add more than 2 kilos because it becomes harder to balance and predict under gnarly terrain. Great video to give us a rough Idea. Also keep in mind that water is almost uncompressable, so under hard hits it can make the tire explode or feel like landing with no suspension.

  6. Expected results obviously. It’s the climb that’s driving the weight loss. Dh only tracks it’s definitely nice to have a bit of weight.

  7. The leightweight trend beyond a certain point becomes incredibly stupid, since its done at the expense of durability.

  8. #AskGMBNTech can you do a piece on which handlebars to upgrade my Trek Fuel EX 8 29, and oval chainrings. Thanks

  9. The real-world differences between what is considered a "heavy" or "lightweight" mountainbike by todays standards is greatly exaggerated.

  10. Brilliant test and well presented! I was wondering if you could do a similar back to back test with the typical stuff you carry on a 20-40km Sunday ride. For example you could load up a camelback with 3L of water. Spare tube, food, emergency tools etc. then mount some of these items on the frame to compare. You could also compare a bumbag to a camelback and a just a water bottle and accessories on the frame.

  11. So in summary I should buy light carbon wheels, but not bother getting a carbon bar, strap some tools and spares on it and have a water bottle, and I'll be winning right? 🙂

  12. Hello from dark and snowy Alaska! Great, interesting video – it inspired me to come up with an idea for another video that would compare downhill speeds between a standard enduro mountain bike, and the ebike version of the same make and model: For example, a Commencal Meta SX against a Commencal Meta Power SX. The timer would start at a fixed location with both bikes already moving at the same speed, so as to eliminate the starting acceleration rate from the test. As long as there was no pedaling allowed, it would be an interesting test to see how the ebike's added sprung weight affects the downhill performance on two bikes that have almost identical suspension, frame design, etc.

  13. Would have been better to use solid weights on the rims than water.
    First of all you don't get inconsistent feel due to the fluid weight, and you're not reducing the inner volume of the tire, causing totally different tire behaviour.

    But nice nevertheless.
    Welcome to the community.

  14. Good stuff! One additional bit of info. would be adding the sprung weight to the bike vs. adding it to the rider. How does adding a few kilos to the bike compare to adding that same weight to the rider? This would be interesting for those of us who may want to reduce the weight of our bikes, but we could also stand to lose some weight from our mid sections! 🙂 For example, is it worth it for someone who's overweight to invest in reducing the sprung weight of their bike? Could be a fun experiment for a future episode!

  15. I thought that was you on Wednesday when you were filming. Annoyed I didnt say anything now! Sweet video though guys 🙂 (anyone wondering where this is, its rowberrow (somerset). come down and ride you will love it )

  16. This test is kinda like comparing 29" wheels to 26" wheels. The 29" wheels having more rotational mass and harder to get moving and worse on trails, while 26" wheels less mass and faster on trails. I think the bike industry sold the riders a bill of goods when they came up with 29" wheels and how much better they are. Then with bigger wheels you have to have wider handlebars for more leverage to turn the heavier wheels. After riding a 29er, jump on a 26" CC bike with 700mm bars and it feels like you are flying. Don't get me started on 1x drive train…

  17. I'd love to see a more realistic video; using two identical enduro frames, on one leave stock components and on the other put a lightweight carbon wheelset, carbon bars, lightweight saddle, lightweight groupset etc.. and compare times and rideability

  18. Water to the wheels is pointless as its adding little rotational inertia or momentum as the water is free to move independently of the wheel apart from the relatively small hydraulic shear resistance. It also affects the compressional volume of the tyres thus affecting the smoothness of the tyre effect.

  19. This is utter bollocks pretending to be science. This idiot could be writing for the daily mail as a science correspondent or worse, be a presenter on GCN.

  20. By putting water into the wheels, you added unsprung mass AND rotational mass. Therefore, you canged two parameters in one test series, making it impossible to evaluate. The weight should have been added to the lower legs of the fork or the chain stays

  21. To properly assess the effects of the additional rotational weight it is best to fit a heavier tire as that actually rotates vs the water that more sloshes and sits to the bottom of the tire

  22. It would have been a better test, i think, if you added solid weight to say the hubs, instead of water in the tires. 1kg of lead attached to each of the hubs for example would add 2kg and would have minimal impact on the rotational weight.

  23. It would have been interesting to see you carry the weight on your body too, I weigh in at 210lbs no gear. Especially on the stopping, and downhill.

  24. I like my #Pinion gearbox! Takes the weight off of the rear suspension thus making it awesomely! Putting at the crank makes the bike much more stable. Ya maybe slightly slower on climbs, but see if the average rider can catch me on an average trail 😉

  25. Your water in the tires is not a fair comparison. You added something that can move around. You need to try this with solid tubes or something to make them the same. Also the weight you added is like comparing a aluminum frame to carbon or something. Now do it with 10-15 lbs to compare e-bike weight to analog bike.

  26. Water in the wheels. Brilliant idea. 1958, Len Beadell and his team drank water stored their tyres to stave off dehydration and complete the Gun Barrel Highway. Up there you might want to Fill them up with warm soup.

  27. I weight 105kg ( 231lbs ) ride a fat bike weighting 20kg ( 44lbs) just the bike with no absorbers, and I carry in it a emergency toolbox, some 10 to 20kg (again 22 – 44 lbs) of stuff, so according to this, I should carrying a total mass of 130kg ( 286 lbs ) over only "tire bounce absorption", and should not be able to make sharp turns on high speeds than a full suspension thin bike and a light rider. However, a big part of that weight is my legs, my core, and my blood, which accounts for what many parts of car do. And that makes all the difference in the same situation to someone who weights 40kg less than me, with overall the same bodyfat index.

    I love anecdotal evidence based science.

  28. i just bought a bike but i think it’s too small cause i have to raise the seat really high if i want to pedal comfortably. (i’m 6’3) is it too small?

  29. Adding water to the wheels just increases rotational weight AND makes them less stable. Also, with less compressible air in the tire the tire will feel will be more progressive, which also make them less compliant and lowers traction. This is not a trade off. It is just something that makes things worse. Instead, you should have put bigger tires with less pressure.

  30. Interesting idea for the test, although I'm guessing water in the wheel is probably more of a part of the rotational mass (unless water level would stay even somehow), which isn't quite the same as adding weight on fork legs, etc… Should partner with GCN folks for some of this 😀

  31. I also think changing the shock settings would be totally beneficial to each bike too…. the change of spring rate on the downhill section, the times would have defintely been different

  32. Why are you measuring weight in kg and stopping distance in feet? That's not very "global." International scientific measuring standards are preferrable when adressing an ninternational audience.
    How many Bananas is a Foot?

  33. 14,5 kg, i had cheap full Ghost asx 4900 2014 with that weight for 1k eur 🙂 Glad i sold that heavy crap 2 yrs ago. Now i got 13kg Ghost Lector 2013 full with carbon frame but its 26'' 🙂

  34. consider testing, a setup, heaver versus light, trackstands, tricky riding where quick adjustments are needed to maintain control, slow or fast speed on singletrack.

  35. How about a test of fat rider weight difference. Down hills add a 12kg vest and see if you can still manual as easily with distance variation and jump as easily and distances variation. What time difference it takes to get down.

  36. More crap from GCN (ie the 'Wiggle' channel) JUST to make everyone needlessly self-conscious about the few milligrams more, our own bikes weigh against the current crop of carbon crap??? Just get on whatever ya got ..and RIDE the fucker!!!

  37. Still don't understand this current trend. When people blast out thousands of dollars on the most expensive and lightest carbon frames, just so they can strap all kinds of crap on the frame, put it inside the frame with SWAT or even put crap in your steer tube and then top it off with couple of water bottles… Does not really make sense to me.

  38. GMBN seems to be scraping the barrel these days. Skipping loads as they seem to be differently worded repeats. Disappointed.

  39. As much as I like this channel, I think this video was poor content…
    1/ Unsprung weight is lower legs / rear triangle. Wheels are unsprung but mainly ROTATING weight, which means that in addition to be some weight activated by the suspension, it is subject to gyroscopic force and rotating inertia. So it affects a lot more the ride than a heavy brake caliper for example. Also, the further the weight is from the center of the wheel, the more you get those effects, which is a reason why 29er feel less agile than 26ers for example.
    I believe this is something that needs to be mentioned in that kind of content
    2/This "scientific" tests with computated digits or whatever at the end is a pure joke isn't it? That brake test. "Oh let's be precise, let's give every configuration say… 1go? Great, sure thing!" Climb test could have been done with a power meter as well, to try at least see how much of a human factor is in those results, and I believe it would have been more interesting to see this one on a bit more of a technical terrain, which might be closer to the reality of what we would encounter…

  40. The only conclusion, I see from that test, is; If you don't want to make your bike slower? Then don't add weight. No matter where you put it, it slows you down. Stock bike won every time.

  41. Completely pointless filling the wheels with water. Makes the experiment a joke. Just use a heavier set of rims vs a lighter set.

  42. That's just faffing around, try it again but with 40kg weight on the frame and some 10kg wheels, to really see, how bad/good it can get…

  43. A) You added rotating un-sprung weight.
    B) You added a lot of unpredictability by adding water. Who knows what it is doing.
    C) Weight balance probably had more to do with your stopping results than actual weight.

    Good test for what running too much sealant feels like, bad for everything else. Should have added the un-sprung weight to the frame in a place it would have been un-sprung and maintained the weight balance of the stock bike.. .

    Bad test

  44. Of course the obvious flaw in this test is that you not only increased unsprung weight but also rotational mass.
    For pure unsprung weight increase you should have simply added weights to the fork legs and chainstays.
    AS was said for decades by weight weenies: 10g reduction in rotational mass equals 30g reduction in total, non-rotating mass.


  46. so… point of this vid is how the bike rides with heavy WHEELS, not how the bike rides with more unsprung weight , say, attached to the stays. water in the wheels throws this whole unscientific from the beginning test, out of the window. Obviously unsprung weight will be bad, but not necessarily because it's a rotating weight. In the same time, more rotating weight will be bad for obvious reasons. Even without THE test it's obvious that adding weight to the bike may only make it better if you add it to the sprung weight, or stays right near the bb. I'd say the lower, the better. Add 3 kg to the rider, and then to the bike, that's what we want to know, whether those 2k for a carbon frame and wheels is worth it. Of course, that's another unscientific test as it wouldn't account for flexing in some ways, and not flexing in other ways that the carbon frames do. And some frames will be fantastic and others will be crap. Intuitively-add weight around the bb, bike will be more planted and stable. It will be heavy too. Ultimately-what do YOU want? I'll tell you though-adding weight on the top of the seat post won't do you any good.

  47. Water in the tires is nothing like the rotational weight of heavier wheel components; much of it will remain in the bottom of the tire instead of rotating with the wheel.

  48. Can GMBN please review the New Zealand Zerode bikes? They use a Pinion gearbox which they claim makes suspension a dream. Downside is overall weight increase and pedal drag efficiency

  49. You lost me when you put water in the tires. Would have been more interested to see something that exaggerates things like heavier drivetrain or wheels. If course water in the tires still just suck.

  50. Small increases in unsprung mass have the effect of reducing acceleration but create more of a spinning top effect.

    1 gram of rim weight to balance my front 20” tire and rim yielded an extra minute of free rotation in a standardised static test.

  51. I am sorry, I need to be that harsh but I honestly think the water idea was stupid and the execution terrible.
    It was not only unsprung weight, it was also semi rotating weight. For purely unsprung weight you should have strapped the weight blocks to the fork and frame near the axle.
    Also the sloshing water behaves very different than just a heavy wheel. (Note that in addition to the moving weight the reduced air volume also alters the suspenion properties of the tire.) For an explicit rotating mass test, you should have used tiny weights on each spoke.
    Then when trying to test for 2kg, more then 3kg massively out if spec (more than 50% off!)
    So you compared 2kg sprung mass to more than 3kg uncontrolledly sloshing, semi rotating mass with bad cushioning tires. In my evaluation someone who respects scientific methodology and informational content would not have published this. At least not without massive disclaimers.

    Do you have actually scientifically minded people on staff or a connection to someone? Maybe you could have someone look over your plans and execution in the future. Maybe publish your plans in the community and let the viewers check the methodology and give suggestions before you go out? (Yeah, don't know if that's a good idea…)
    Also try to be prepared to change thing on site, often you notice flaws only when you are already in the field. In this you could at least have corrected the amount of water in the tires.
    (While I'm at it: In most experimental videos on the different channels I see only one set ot test runs back-to-back. I hope you actually control for human variability and fatigue. For many tests I would even prefer a motor with fixed power.)

  52. Can anybody help me? I recently got my new mtb with deore brakes on it. I realized that when i am riding the bike upright nothing is going wrong but when i am leaning it over the disc starts rubbing like crazy. I took it to my local bike shop and they said that the disc is not bend an they couldn t hear any sound.(it is a 29er). Is there something wrong ?

  53. Think about trying to spin a half full water bottle in the air….
    The resistance of the water stops the rotation almost straight away, if you have ever towed a half full water tank behind a car you would be familiar with the free-flow effect on handling.
    Can you please do this again with fixed weights on the wheels instead of sloshing water.
    Even just sliding the weights you put on the frame between the spokes would have been a more accurate option.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *