Click here to visit the donation page | View all sponsors
  Pennock's Fiero Forum
  Technical Discussion & Questions
  My 1988 LFX F40 build. (Page 6)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Email This Page to Someone! | Printable Version

This topic is 6 pages long:  1   2   3   4   5   6 
Previous Page | Next Page
next newest topic | next oldest topic
My 1988 LFX F40 build. by Daryl M
Started on: 01-02-2019 10:42 PM
Replies: 220 (4228 views)
Last post by: Daryl M on 11-14-2019 06:46 PM
fieroguru
Member

Posts: 10946
From: Champaign, IL
Registered: Aug 2003


Feedback score:    (44)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 255
Rate this member

Report this Post11-06-2019 07:02 PM Click Here to See the Profile for fieroguruSend a Private Message to fieroguruEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Daryl M:
Still looking for where the hose fitting in photo #3 should go. I remember hearing that there may not be a pcv valve on this engine.


GM switched to a fixed orifice bleed for the positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) and stopped using a valve.

The tube/nipple/barb with the small orifice should connect to a filtered vacuum port on the intake (this is the dirty air exit to the intake manifold).

The other valve cover (or valley cover) should have another fitting/tube that is more open. That should connect to a filtered and metered air port (clean, metered air to enter the engine). This port/nipple should be in the air intake tube, after the MAF (metered) and before the throttle body. It looks like the rubber boot between the two has a nipple for this purpose.

If you wanted two, you could switch the connection points and change the air flow path through the engine, I just think having the smaller orifice end on the dirty air exit will help keep oil droplets from getting into the intake. On my LS4 swap I added a catch can on the dirty air line and it collects about 1" of oil ever y oil change (5000 miles).

IP: Logged

Will
Member

Posts: 12963
From: Where you least expect me
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 234
Rate this member

Report this Post11-07-2019 09:09 AM Click Here to See the Profile for WillClick Here to Email WillSend a Private Message to WillEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Daryl M:

Yes, I spun the boot and things lined up nicely.
Thanks


Ah, ok. I see it now. Good to hear.

 
quote
Originally posted by Daryl M:

Still looking for where the hose fitting in photo #3 should go. I remember hearing that there may not be a pcv valve on this engine.


1. What's the fitting on the manifold between the broken fitting and the fuel connection (right above the connection in the #3 photo)?
2. What's the valve right next to the throttle on the inside of the elbow on the manifold?

 
quote
Originally posted by fieroguru:

GM switched to a fixed orifice bleed for the positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) and stopped using a valve.

The tube/nipple/barb with the small orifice should connect to a filtered vacuum port on the intake (this is the dirty air exit to the intake manifold).

The other valve cover (or valley cover) should have another fitting/tube that is more open. That should connect to a filtered and metered air port (clean, metered air to enter the engine). This port/nipple should be in the air intake tube, after the MAF (metered) and before the throttle body. It looks like the rubber boot between the two has a nipple for this purpose.


We're pretty sure the connection from the front cam cover to the intake boot is the PCV fresh air.

There's a surprising amount of engineering that goes into PCV systems. Don't second guess GM on that one... just hook it up the way they did and send it.

IP: Logged

Daryl M
Member

Posts: 374
From: Wittmann, Arizona, USA
Registered: Aug 2016


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-07-2019 12:08 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Daryl MClick Here to Email Daryl MSend a Private Message to Daryl MEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Will:


1. Two heater core fittings plus a connection to the pressurized surge tank
2. Possible throttle body coolant + high point bleed connection to pressurized surge tank
3. Probably PCV vacuum connection
4. Ok.
5. It's taped over.
6. Probably PCV fresh air connection
7. Ok.
8. Ok.
9. Probably PCV fresh air connection. If you rotate the tube, it'll probably line up with the fitting in #6.

Looks like you have a broken fitting on your intake manifold above the center cylinder in the rear bank.



Will, what are the chances that the fitting in pic 3 and the gizmo in pic 2 connect to a vapor canister for the fuel vent system?

IP: Logged

Will
Member

Posts: 12963
From: Where you least expect me
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 234
Rate this member

Report this Post11-07-2019 01:05 PM Click Here to See the Profile for WillClick Here to Email WillSend a Private Message to WillEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Daryl M:


Will, what are the chances that the fitting in pic 3 and the gizmo in pic 2 connect to a vapor canister for the fuel vent system?


Good point.
Probably low. The gizmo could very well be an EECS solenoid. It would connect to a vapor canister for the fuel vent system, but probably does not connect to the PCV system.

IP: Logged

Daryl M
Member

Posts: 374
From: Wittmann, Arizona, USA
Registered: Aug 2016


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-07-2019 02:29 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Daryl MClick Here to Email Daryl MSend a Private Message to Daryl MEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post







Finally got a bottom in the reduced size trunk. I lost a bit of room to accomodate the exhaust system and the sway bar, but I think it was an acceptable compramise. Still room for a duffle bag for an overnight trip, or a couple of camping chairs and car detail suplies when we go to the local parking lot car shows. Good thing I seldom win. No room for a trophy.

IP: Logged

Daryl M
Member

Posts: 374
From: Wittmann, Arizona, USA
Registered: Aug 2016


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-07-2019 02:38 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Daryl MClick Here to Email Daryl MSend a Private Message to Daryl MEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Will:


We're pretty sure the connection from the front cam cover to the intake boot is the PCV fresh air.

There's a surprising amount of engineering that goes into PCV systems. Don't second guess GM on that one... just hook it up the way they did and send it.

Guru, I have read that a catch can does help with buildup on the intake valves. Is that true?

IP: Logged

Daryl M
Member

Posts: 374
From: Wittmann, Arizona, USA
Registered: Aug 2016


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-08-2019 01:48 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Daryl MClick Here to Email Daryl MSend a Private Message to Daryl MEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Will:


We're pretty sure the connection from the front cam cover to the intake boot is the PCV fresh air.

There's a surprising amount of engineering that goes into PCV systems. Don't second guess GM on that one... just hook it up the way they did and send it.


As for the fitting (question #1) the broken one used to look kinda like that. They both were to mount the engine cover.

IP: Logged

Will
Member

Posts: 12963
From: Where you least expect me
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 234
Rate this member

Report this Post11-08-2019 09:39 AM Click Here to See the Profile for WillClick Here to Email WillSend a Private Message to WillEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Daryl M:

Guru, I have read that a catch can does help with buildup on the intake valves. Is that true?


How much trouble does the LFX have with deposits? I thought the engines that had problems with valve deposits were mostly the ones with external EGR. Soot from the EGR mixes with oil vapor from the PCV system to produce wet gunk that adheres to the valve, then cokes. Take the EGR out of the mix and it's not nearly as much of a problem.

IP: Logged

Raydar
Member

Posts: 38042
From: West ATL GA 'burbs Powder Springs
Registered: Oct 1999


Feedback score:    (11)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 449
Rate this member

Report this Post11-08-2019 05:10 PM Click Here to See the Profile for RaydarClick Here to Email RaydarSend a Private Message to RaydarEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Will:

How much trouble does the LFX have with deposits?
...


I have read some posts on the Camaro forum that lead me to believe that intake valve deposits really are "a thing" with the DI V6s, including the LFX.
To the point that people were talking about blasting the valves (hopefully while closed) with walnut shells, and then installing a catch can.

I would be inclined to pull the intake manifold(s) - if they haven't been, already - and at least check the valves. Base your decision to implement a catch can according to how the valves look, how many miles are on the engine, and how many miles you think you'll put on it. Just MHO.

[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 11-08-2019).]

IP: Logged

Daryl M
Member

Posts: 374
From: Wittmann, Arizona, USA
Registered: Aug 2016


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-08-2019 10:56 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Daryl MClick Here to Email Daryl MSend a Private Message to Daryl MEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Raydar:


I have read some posts on the Camaro forum that lead me to believe that intake valve deposits really are "a thing" with the DI V6s, including the LFX.
To the point that people were talking about blasting the valves (hopefully while closed) with walnut shells, and then installing a catch can.

I would be inclined to pull the intake manifold(s) - if they haven't been, already - and at least check the valves. Base your decision to implement a catch can according to how the valves look, how many miles are on the engine, and how many miles you think you'll put on it. Just MHO.



The LFX was GMs main passenger car V6 from 2012 to 2016. It was used in Cadillacs, Chevys, Buicks and GMC cars and crossovers. That's a bunch of cars. If it were a serious problem, GM would have fixed it, wouldn't they? A catch can can't hurt, but I don't think intake valve buildup will be a high priority.

IP: Logged

Will
Member

Posts: 12963
From: Where you least expect me
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 234
Rate this member

Report this Post11-10-2019 06:40 PM Click Here to See the Profile for WillClick Here to Email WillSend a Private Message to WillEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by fieroguru:

On my LS4 swap I added a catch can on the dirty air line and it collects about 1" of oil ever y oil change (5000 miles).



 
quote
Originally posted by Daryl M:

Guru, I have read that a catch can does help with buildup on the intake valves. Is that true?


I'm going to change my position on this slightly.

For DI engines, run a catch can in between the PCV *OUTLET* and the manifold. IOW, the can will see manifold vacuum. Do *NOT* switch the flow direction. GM spends a lot of money designing oil separators that are highly efficient for the space available inside the valve cover. DI has made OEM level PCV oil separation requirements MUCH more stringent than port injection oil separation requirements were. The LFX, as a second generation DI engine, has the benefit of better PCV oil separation than older engines, including the LLT.

That being said, if you have extra space for a catch can, or gross overkill like a Mann & Hummel ProVent, using it to clean up the small amount of PCV oil that gets through GM's system will be beneficial for preventing valve deposits in the engine.

IOW, use the original PCV system, intact, in the original flow direction, but optionally add a catch can in between the valve cover outlet and the manifold vacuum connection.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited 11-10-2019).]

IP: Logged

Daryl M
Member

Posts: 374
From: Wittmann, Arizona, USA
Registered: Aug 2016


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-10-2019 10:53 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Daryl MClick Here to Email Daryl MSend a Private Message to Daryl MEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Will:


I'm going to change my position on this slightly.

For DI engines, run a catch can in between the PCV *OUTLET* and the manifold. IOW, the can will see manifold vacuum. Do *NOT* switch the flow direction. GM spends a lot of money designing oil separators that are highly efficient for the space available inside the valve cover. DI has made OEM level PCV oil separation requirements MUCH more stringent than port injection oil separation requirements were. The LFX, as a second generation DI engine, has the benefit of better PCV oil separation than older engines, including the LLT.

That being said, if you have extra space for a catch can, or gross overkill like a Mann & Hummel ProVent, using it to clean up the small amount of PCV oil that gets through GM's system will be beneficial for preventing valve deposits in the engine.

IOW, use the original PCV system, intact, in the original flow direction, but optionally add a catch can in between the valve cover outlet and the manifold vacuum connection.



Great suggestion to add the can. I do have a question about location. Does it matter how high or low the can is in relation to the engine?

IP: Logged

fieroguru
Member

Posts: 10946
From: Champaign, IL
Registered: Aug 2003


Feedback score:    (44)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 255
Rate this member

Report this Post11-11-2019 06:34 AM Click Here to See the Profile for fieroguruSend a Private Message to fieroguruEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Daryl M:

Guru, I have read that a catch can does help with buildup on the intake valves. Is that true?


Sending an oil mist through the intake will leave oil deposits everywhere inside (plenum, runners, back side of valves, etc.)
Traditional port fuel injected engines point the injector at the back of the valves, which helps to rinse them off and keep them clean.
DI engines move the injector into the combustion chamber, so any oil deposits that end up on the back side of the valve will collect over time and cause some form of buildup.

I mounted my catch can as low as possible and away from the exhaust heat for 2 reasons.
1. It will keep the walls of the can cooler than the air coming out the PCV port, which will help condense and collect any vapors.
2. The return from the oil can is an up hill path, so any mist that makes it past the can, has a secondary chance of condensing and rolling back down the tube and into the can before being introduced into the intake manifold.

IP: Logged

Will
Member

Posts: 12963
From: Where you least expect me
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 234
Rate this member

Report this Post11-11-2019 10:11 AM Click Here to See the Profile for WillClick Here to Email WillSend a Private Message to WillEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by fieroguru:

Sending an oil mist through the intake will leave oil deposits everywhere inside (plenum, runners, back side of valves, etc.)
Traditional port fuel injected engines point the injector at the back of the valves, which helps to rinse them off and keep them clean.
DI engines move the injector into the combustion chamber, so any oil deposits that end up on the back side of the valve will collect over time and cause some form of buildup.

I mounted my catch can as low as possible and away from the exhaust heat for 2 reasons.
1. It will keep the walls of the can cooler than the air coming out the PCV port, which will help condense and collect any vapors.
2. The return from the oil can is an up hill path, so any mist that makes it past the can, has a secondary chance of condensing and rolling back down the tube and into the can before being introduced into the intake manifold.


EGR introduced into the manifold makes the problem MUCH worse than PCV vapors by themselves.
In a port injected engine, fuel is continuously washing any residue off the intake valves before it cokes.

Interestingly, Porsche's new DI engines position the injector such that it sprays the backs of the intake valves while they're open.

IP: Logged

Daryl M
Member

Posts: 374
From: Wittmann, Arizona, USA
Registered: Aug 2016


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-11-2019 10:43 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Daryl MClick Here to Email Daryl MSend a Private Message to Daryl MEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

I love that you guys know so much about this stuff and are so willing to help . by the way, happy Veterans Day.

[This message has been edited by Daryl M (edited 11-11-2019).]

IP: Logged

Joseph Upson
Member

Posts: 4870
From:
Registered: Jan 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 88
Rate this member

Report this Post11-13-2019 06:17 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Joseph UpsonClick Here to Email Joseph UpsonSend a Private Message to Joseph UpsonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

Definitely install an oil catch can. The PCV valve changed for the LFX, but some of them use the same valve as the LLT and there is no baffling on the right side valve cover except for the partition with three small holes that is molded into the valve cover gasket for that side, so I wouldn't expect there to be much of a difference in oil passage into the intake between the motors, except where differences in the PCV effect it. The right side valve cover gasket molding enhancement, is a later design for the 3.6L that was implemented to help with baffling, but the old design without the partition is still available and some unwittingly purchase it.

Some have also proposed modifying the holes in the pcv valve, in an effort to reduce the tendency of the crankcase gasses from reversing at moderately high to wideopen throttle and flowing backward into the lower resistance clean side upstream of the throttlebody. Enlarging the holes results in more oil exiting the valve cover, giving a reason to need to check and empty the catch can recommended, along with the mod routinely, when you should want the oil to stay in the motor.

Below are some pictures of my intake valves, which I cleaned using the intake valve adjusting sequence for the cam in block motor, closing the target valves in groups of three. I used a cheap flexible camera and a digital camera that had difficulty negotiating the angle involved later in the day and couldn't get as good a picture of the clean valves as I did the dirty valves.

If the residue is bad enough, it has a tendency to interfere with cold startup and idle in the form of reversion and misfires that can to some degree be masked with premium fuel, which is a waste given the motor was rated on 87 octane. See the video link along with the thread of origin at the bottom.






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=injo3XS5eJg

https://www.cadillacforums....cold-starts.1043882/

IP: Logged

Daryl M
Member

Posts: 374
From: Wittmann, Arizona, USA
Registered: Aug 2016


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-13-2019 07:24 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Daryl MClick Here to Email Daryl MSend a Private Message to Daryl MEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

Definitely install an oil catch can. The PCV valve changed for the LFX, but some of them use the same valve as the LLT and there is no baffling on the right side valve cover except for the partition with three small holes that is molded into the valve cover gasket for that side, so I wouldn't expect there to be much of a difference in oil passage into the intake between the motors, except where differences in the PCV effect it. The right side valve cover gasket molding enhancement, is a later design for the 3.6L that was implemented to help with baffling, but the old design without the partition is still available and some unwittingly purchase it.

Some have also proposed modifying the holes in the pcv valve, in an effort to reduce the tendency of the crankcase gasses from reversing at moderately high to wideopen throttle and flowing backward into the lower resistance clean side upstream of the throttlebody. Enlarging the holes results in more oil exiting the valve cover, giving a reason to need to check and empty the catch can recommended, along with the mod routinely, when you should want the oil to stay in the motor.

Below are some pictures of my intake valves, which I cleaned using the intake valve adjusting sequence for the cam in block motor, closing the target valves in groups of three. I used a cheap flexible camera and a digital camera that had difficulty negotiating the angle involved later in the day and couldn't get as good a picture of the clean valves as I did the dirty valves.

If the residue is bad enough, it has a tendency to interfere with cold startup and idle in the form of reversion and misfires that can to some degree be masked with premium fuel, which is a waste given the motor was rated on 87 octane. See the video link along with the thread of origin at the bottom.






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=injo3XS5eJg

https://www.cadillacforums....cold-starts.1043882/

It is my understanding that the Cadillacs in the videos werenot the newer LFX motor, but were the LF1 3 liter. Is that what you understand too?

IP: Logged

Will
Member

Posts: 12963
From: Where you least expect me
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 234
Rate this member

Report this Post11-13-2019 07:41 PM Click Here to See the Profile for WillClick Here to Email WillSend a Private Message to WillEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

which is a waste given the motor was rated on 87 octane. See the video link along with the thread of origin at the bottom.



While being "rated" for 87, the LLT at least definitely performs better on 91+

IP: Logged

Will
Member

Posts: 12963
From: Where you least expect me
Registered: Jun 2000


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 234
Rate this member

Report this Post11-14-2019 09:35 AM Click Here to See the Profile for WillClick Here to Email WillSend a Private Message to WillEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Daryl M:

It is my understanding that the Cadillacs in the videos werenot the newer LFX motor, but were the LF1 3 liter. Is that what you understand too?


The LF1 and LLT are the same "generation" of DI engines... that is, first generation before these issues were well understood by OEMs.

IP: Logged

Joseph Upson
Member

Posts: 4870
From:
Registered: Jan 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 88
Rate this member

Report this Post11-14-2019 02:18 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Joseph UpsonClick Here to Email Joseph UpsonSend a Private Message to Joseph UpsonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Daryl M:

It is my understanding that the Cadillacs in the videos werenot the newer LFX motor, but were the LF1 3 liter. Is that what you understand too?


That may be, but the same principles are at play. I chose that example because I encountered it recently while searching for something else. If the Camaro forum is any indication, there are more oil catch cans on LFX motors than any of the predecessors.


 
quote
Originally posted by Will:

While being "rated" for 87, the LLT at least definitely performs better on 91+


That has not been my experience with mine and hence part of the reason I stopped putting premium in it. My 32 mpg hwy best over a common 80 mile trip that I make from time to time was not on premium fuel which I have not used in more than a year now. Doesn't mean it is not possible for an example to perform better with more octane, but I can no longer rationalize the use of premium for performance specs achieved on regular. I may mount up the acelerometer and fill up with it again for another try.

There is documentation in my owners manual that supports moving to 89 octane for better performance in like vehicles equipped with the LY7 port injected 3.6L, if spark knock is detected, but no such recommendation for the direct injected motor. The direct injection is that efficient, the LLT is 11.3:1 and the LFX 11.5:1 compression, both rated on 87 octane which should pretty much dampen the notion that there is any more to be had with premium except where the tune has been altered. If there were, I'd expect GM to have stated so in the owners manual.

As I mentioned previously, premium does tend to have an audible effect on cold starts if they are like what's heard in the video by decreasing and eliminating them altogether, but that's only masking the real issue.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 11-14-2019).]

IP: Logged

Daryl M
Member

Posts: 374
From: Wittmann, Arizona, USA
Registered: Aug 2016


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-14-2019 06:46 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Daryl MClick Here to Email Daryl MSend a Private Message to Daryl MEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:


That has not been my experience with mine and hence part of the reason I stopped putting premium in it. My 32 mpg hwy best over a common 80 mile trip that I make from time to time was not on premium fuel which I have not used in more than a year now. Doesn't mean it is not possible for an example to perform better with more octane, but I can no longer rationalize the use of premium for performance specs achieved on regular. I may mount up the acelerometer and fill up with it again for another try.

There is documentation in my owners manual that supports moving to 89 octane for better performance in like vehicles equipped with the LY7 port injected 3.6L, if spark knock is detected, but no such recommendation for the direct injected motor. The direct injection is that efficient, the LLT is 11.3:1 and the LFX 11.5:1 compression, both rated on 87 octane which should pretty much dampen the notion that there is any more to be had with premium except where the tune has been altered. If there were, I'd expect GM to have stated so in the owners manual.

As I mentioned previously, premium does tend to have an audible effect on cold starts if they are like what's heard in the video by decreasing and eliminating them altogether, but that's only masking the real issue.



Luckily, I live in Phoenix where there is no such thing as a cold start.😝😝😝


IP: Logged

Previous Page | Next Page

This topic is 6 pages long:  1   2   3   4   5   6 
next newest topic | next oldest topic

All times are ET (US)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Back To Main Page

Advertizing on PFF | Fiero Parts Vendors
PFF Merchandise | Fiero Gallery | Ogre's Cave
Real-Time Chat | Fiero Related Auctions on eBay



Copyright (c) 1999, C. Pennock