The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!
02-14-14, 09:24 AM
#1627
Not really. Have you not weighed a full factory exhaust and compared it to full aftermarket stainless? The weight differences are massive. The base stripped down model fd weighs about 2,750lbs. You can easily drop the weight into the high 2,600's by removing the boat ankor full factory exhaust and replacing it with a full stainless setup.
I've corner weighed and set up quite a few FDs. All of them with various aftermarket exhausts. Sure it makes a difference. But i still see them regularly weigh in over 2800 (with some fuel) Even with other weight reductions.
02-14-14, 09:56 AM
#1629
Rotary Enthusiast
I wonder if a 600 cc rotor revs to a higher redline. Also, it would be great if the new engine could handle boost better than the Renesis.
02-14-14, 10:03 AM
#1630
I should qualify: that 2600/350 car should in no way be the $100k overwrought Z06 competitor that everyone seems to be afraid of. Nowhere near. That's just the minimum I think you need to make a compelling, differentiated RX7 offering worthy of the brand. That car is maybe $45k. 370z/Cayman competitor
02-14-14, 10:03 AM
#1631
02-14-14, 10:08 AM
#1633
Senior Member
I didn't do the conversion, a friend of mine built the car and then had to sell it, so I swooped in
Honestly, at the time I was looking for a fixed-roof DD to replace my S2000 and be a good backup track car. Always loved the FD, but didn't want to have to become a turbo-rotary expert and still be walking on eggshells regarding engine longevity/reliability. I would have been happy with stock LS1 horsepower, honestly! But pulling hard to 7000rpm with monster torque all the way up is pretty cool...
When this car became available, I had to have it, but I had to partial-trade my beloved 240Z for it
And kept the S2000.
Honestly, The difference in weight between a car that makes 250 hp vs a car that makes 350 or even 400 is MINIMAL. If you're looking at a target horsepower/weight ration, like say, 7:1, adding 50 hp will NOT automatically require the addition of 350 lbs of support.
In the real world, they already make the Miata. I'm certainly not against a hardtop rotary powered "RX-5", with 200-something HP, but I'm not likely to buy it, and I can't figure out why you would either after driving your LS/FD.
On the street, which is the only place 85% of any new RX-7 will be driven, there's just no need for more than 250hp in a ~2600 lb. car. Hell, on the street I'm never even in VTEC in the S2000, so for that usage it's a ~150hp 2800-lb. car and it's *still* fricking BRILLIANT!
The model (RX7) has moved on from where it was as the FB, to the FC and then the FD, as did most of it's competitors. Look at the new Supra Concept. I think it would be silly to build an RX7 that's a downgrade.
Besides, the MAJOR problem with the FD that gave it such abysmal sales was the lack of a base non-turbo version. There should have been a ~200hp base-model na FD. Which probably wouldn't have had as many reliability issues as the twin-turbo model...
I'm not sure how this became an "elitist" thing in your mind—performance standards have GONE UP, it's that simple.
Last edited by ZDan; 02-14-14 at 10:13 AM.
02-14-14, 10:20 AM
#1634
Senior Member
250hp/2600 lb. 50F/50R (or better) *base* RX-7 would obviously be in a different league performance-wise than the 55/45 FRS/BRZ. It would have better power/weight than a Cayman.
02-14-14, 10:25 AM
#1635
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
It did 184.8 in the standing mile. Should be good for right around 200mph with more room
I didn't do the conversion, a friend of mine built the car and then had to sell it, so I swooped in
Honestly, at the time I was looking for a fixed-roof DD to replace my S2000 and be a good backup track car. Always loved the FD, but didn't want to have to become a turbo-rotary expert and still be walking on eggshells regarding engine longevity/reliability. I would have been happy with stock LS1 horsepower, honestly! But pulling hard to 7000rpm with monster torque all the way up is pretty cool...
When this car became available, I had to have it, but I had to partial-trade my beloved 240Z for it And kept the S2000.
I don't disagree. Weight gain doesn't have to be huge. Probably talking something like +100-150 lb. for 350-400hp accounting for bigger engine (or turbos), higher-capacity cooling, bigger wheels/tires/brakes vs. a 250hp "base" model.
A 250hp 2600-lb. fixed-roof coupe sports car is emphatically NOT a Miata!
On the street, which is the only place 85% of any new RX-7 will be driven, there's just no need for more than 250hp in a ~2600 lb. car. Hell, on the street I'm never even in VTEC in the S2000, so for that usage it's a ~150hp 2800-lb. car and it's *still* fricking BRILLIANT!
250 modern SAE spec horsepower (greater than 255 mid-90s Mazda claimed horsepower), in a 2600 lb. car, would be a significant performance UPgrade over the FD. We're talking 105mph in the 1/4 vs. 100.
Besides, the MAJOR problem with the FD that gave it such abysmal sales was the lack of a base non-turbo version. There should have been a ~200hp base-model na FD. Which probably wouldn't have had as many reliability issues as the twin-turbo model...
It seems elitist to me that though we would both like to see a ~350-400hp new RX-7, some of you can't stand the idea of there being a 250hp base model, even though that would MORE than meet the actual real-world performance demands of 85-95% of the potential buyers.
I didn't do the conversion, a friend of mine built the car and then had to sell it, so I swooped in
Honestly, at the time I was looking for a fixed-roof DD to replace my S2000 and be a good backup track car. Always loved the FD, but didn't want to have to become a turbo-rotary expert and still be walking on eggshells regarding engine longevity/reliability. I would have been happy with stock LS1 horsepower, honestly! But pulling hard to 7000rpm with monster torque all the way up is pretty cool...
When this car became available, I had to have it, but I had to partial-trade my beloved 240Z for it
And kept the S2000.I don't disagree. Weight gain doesn't have to be huge. Probably talking something like +100-150 lb. for 350-400hp accounting for bigger engine (or turbos), higher-capacity cooling, bigger wheels/tires/brakes vs. a 250hp "base" model.
A 250hp 2600-lb. fixed-roof coupe sports car is emphatically NOT a Miata!
On the street, which is the only place 85% of any new RX-7 will be driven, there's just no need for more than 250hp in a ~2600 lb. car. Hell, on the street I'm never even in VTEC in the S2000, so for that usage it's a ~150hp 2800-lb. car and it's *still* fricking BRILLIANT!
250 modern SAE spec horsepower (greater than 255 mid-90s Mazda claimed horsepower), in a 2600 lb. car, would be a significant performance UPgrade over the FD. We're talking 105mph in the 1/4 vs. 100.
Besides, the MAJOR problem with the FD that gave it such abysmal sales was the lack of a base non-turbo version. There should have been a ~200hp base-model na FD. Which probably wouldn't have had as many reliability issues as the twin-turbo model...
It seems elitist to me that though we would both like to see a ~350-400hp new RX-7, some of you can't stand the idea of there being a 250hp base model, even though that would MORE than meet the actual real-world performance demands of 85-95% of the potential buyers.
S2k is a bore (I owned one for about 2 months) compared to DD FD.
02-14-14, 10:27 AM
#1636
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,979
Received 2,686 Likes
on
1,901 Posts
The model (RX7) has moved on from where it was as the FB, to the FC and then the FD, as did most of it's competitors. Look at the new Supra Concept. I think it would be silly to build an RX7 that's a downgrade. I'm not sure how this became an "elitist" thing in your mind—performance standards have GONE UP, it's that simple.
performance standards have gone up.
the SA is 2400lbs, 100hp, on 185/??/13's
the Mazda 2, was 2300lbs, 100hp, on 185/??/13's.
i would still take a lighter car over bigger hp though
02-14-14, 10:29 AM
#1637
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
WTF.............face it a 250 hp 2600lb car is going to be a bore compared to it's competitors and it should most definitely not have the RX7 monikar on it.
02-14-14, 10:44 AM
#1638
Senior Member
Also, sports cars *can* be somewhat practical. My 240Z was! I could fit TONS of stuff in that car (4 race wheels/tires, tools, helmet, floorjack, overnight bag, etc.). Purposely making a car less practical doesn't make it "more sporty". The intentionally "selfish" (in the words of a 350Z stylist!), way less practical (in terms of carrying stuff around) 350Z/370Z are not anything like as sporty as the 240Z.
S2k is a bore (I owned one for about 2 months) compared to DD FD.
What year S2k? I've driven stock and modded (obviously) FDs, and honestly my stock '01 S2000 is more fun to drive on the street. The FD's 16.6:1 rack is PAINFULLY slow to me vs. the ultra-quick 13.8:1 steering in the AP1 S2k. It makes the FD feel bigger and less responsive.
Stock AP1 spring and damping rates are spot-on for performance/street as well.
02-14-14, 10:51 AM
#1639
Senior Member
Dan that's not enough difference for me to care about, so I guess I'll have to get the STI BRZ or wait I'll just buy a mustang.
WTF.............face it a 250 hp 2600lb car is going to be a bore compared to it's competitors and it should most definitely not have the RX7 monikar on it.
WTF.............face it a 250 hp 2600lb car is going to be a bore compared to it's competitors and it should most definitely not have the RX7 monikar on it.
For those who can only enjoy a car if it "beats" or runs with Corvettes (even though the vast majority will never go head-to-head with one), get the optional 350-400hp turbo or multi-rotor version!
If a 3600 lb mustang appeals to you, you're not really what I'd call the target audience for a new RX-7!
STi BRZ will not be turbo'd, will have 250hp *at most*, will likely be over 2800 lb. and will keep the same suck-*** 55/45 weight distribution. You'd really rather have that than a new RX-7 with the same power, 200 lb. lighterweight, with 50/50 weight distribution?!
Last edited by ZDan; 02-14-14 at 11:17 AM.
02-14-14, 11:17 AM
#1640
Yeah. Remember, a 350 fwhp (or 250 fwhp) N/A rotary isn't going to have a lot of torque. By the time any of this gets to market, the 370Z will make 350 that in a package with more grunt, and they're talking about making the next iteration lighter.
The Z is the natural competitor here, not the BRZ. Like I say, 2600/350 get's you in the ballpark against what Nissan will likely be building at that point. I think you're going to have a tough time selling a car w/ 250hp and no torque that comes up short against a 370Z, which isn't that exciting in the first place.
CURRENT 370Z: 330/3200 = 9.6 lbs/hp
A 2600 lb rotary is going to need AT LEAST 275 hp to match the current car Nissan offers, more really due to lack of torque.
For a 3,100 lb, 350 hp future Z (which would be no problem for Nissan), = 8.8 lbs/hp. Now our thoretical RX7 needs at least 300 hp. The 2600/350 target really isn't that outlandish or aspirational anymore. It's just getting you in the game. Aspirational would be 2600/450
The Z is the natural competitor here, not the BRZ. Like I say, 2600/350 get's you in the ballpark against what Nissan will likely be building at that point. I think you're going to have a tough time selling a car w/ 250hp and no torque that comes up short against a 370Z, which isn't that exciting in the first place.
CURRENT 370Z: 330/3200 = 9.6 lbs/hp
A 2600 lb rotary is going to need AT LEAST 275 hp to match the current car Nissan offers, more really due to lack of torque.
For a 3,100 lb, 350 hp future Z (which would be no problem for Nissan), = 8.8 lbs/hp. Now our thoretical RX7 needs at least 300 hp. The 2600/350 target really isn't that outlandish or aspirational anymore. It's just getting you in the game. Aspirational would be 2600/450
Last edited by ptrhahn; 02-14-14 at 11:28 AM.
02-14-14, 11:35 AM
#1641
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
Again, IMO 250hp/2600 lb. would be more of a true RX7 than the 2850 lb. 235hp (modern SAE net) FD, and TOTALLY worthy of the moniker!
For those who can only enjoy a car if it "beats" or runs with Corvettes (even though the vast majority will never go head-to-head with one), get the optional 350-400hp turbo or multi-rotor version!
If a 3600 lb mustang appeals to you, you're not really what I'd call the target audience for a new RX-7!
STi BRZ will not be turbo'd, will have 250hp *at most*, will likely be over 2800 lb. and will keep the same suck-*** 55/45 weight distribution. You'd really rather have that than a new RX-7 with the same power, 200 lb. lighterweight, with 50/50 weight distribution?!
For those who can only enjoy a car if it "beats" or runs with Corvettes (even though the vast majority will never go head-to-head with one), get the optional 350-400hp turbo or multi-rotor version!
If a 3600 lb mustang appeals to you, you're not really what I'd call the target audience for a new RX-7!
STi BRZ will not be turbo'd, will have 250hp *at most*, will likely be over 2800 lb. and will keep the same suck-*** 55/45 weight distribution. You'd really rather have that than a new RX-7 with the same power, 200 lb. lighterweight, with 50/50 weight distribution?!
As far as the FD steering goes all you need to do is put a smaller steering wheel on it.
I think there are way too many people who never drove a properly running FD. The two cars don't come close to comparing, even an FD with a DP and intake will dyno around 260. The cars HP was under rated for the most part while the S2k was over rated.
Sorry but even a 3600 pound car is more fun than a 2600 pound car when it has twice the power.
Someone said driving an sm with hoosiers was a blast and I agree but driving a 3000lb sports car with 3 times the power is 10 times more fun.
I've driven some SM cars and sure they are fun little cars but they are also the least fun track car I've ever owned/driven.
I love light weight cars but lets face it as soon as I hit the gas if I'm bored from that point forward until I brake well I'm missing half the fun. I like having as much fun getting out of the corner as getting into the corner.
02-14-14, 12:05 PM
#1642
That's an issue for you yank blokes far more than it is for us over in Ozland. We never compared the rx7 to the vette because we didn't have the vette. Back in early 90's it could compete with the vette, because let's face it, it wasn't the best engineered thing on the road. 20 years has changed things somewhat, and now the vette is far more on the potential it should have had back at the 5L v8 stage.
Here, we compare it against other Jap marques and baselineish german cars. It can't be compared with the M3 anymore because that has become a monster but it should be pushing M1 territory. Mazda is known for making little sporty cars. They don't have to produce a 400 hp whatever to maintain that reputation.
So tell me this: if chevy, nissan, BMW, ford all have been able to pump out +400HP production cars then why can't mazda? Why must mazda be a paltry low power sporty car brand? Why is it that too many people can't picture a company growing and therefore pigeon hole them into a category that they were 20 years ago? Seriously it's not like Chevy/BMV/Nissan/porsche SPAWNED +400 HP cars from the day their first car rolled off the assembly line. No they evolved to what they are today.
At the end of the day, if people really aren't happy with the power output, stick an LS in and be done with it.
my $0.02
Last edited by Montego; 02-14-14 at 12:19 PM.
02-14-14, 12:12 PM
#1643
Senior Member
I had a 2000 s2k back in around 2002 and actually probably had it about 4 months. I thoroughly enjoyed it and put about 5k miles on it but it was not nearly as fun as a 300 rwhp fd with bolt ons. At that time I was into going out late at night with my wife and having fun so I drove it VERY HARD hehe
No, it's not FAST, but it is FUN!
As far as the FD steering goes all you need to do is put a smaller steering wheel on it.
Currently have a 350mm steering wheel (same diameter as stock S2000), ~30mm smaller in diameter than stock. Afraid smaller might block gauges...
I think there are way too many people who never drove a properly running FD. The two cars don't come close to comparing, even an FD with a DP and intake will dyno around 260. The cars HP was under rated for the most part while the S2k was over rated.
Using the somewhat-trusty hp equation: hp = (trap speed/234)^3 x weight, and assuming 180 lb. worth of driver and gear, I get 243hp for the FD, 240hp for the AP1.
Stock vs. stock, they're damn close...
Obviously with the turbo, there's a LOT of improvement that can easily be had with the FD.
But that's all beside the point ON THE STREET. Do you REALLY use a car's full power regularly on the street? Because 99% of the time it's just not possible without officially "driving like an ****"!
Sorry but even a 3600 pound car is more fun than a 2600 pound car when it has twice the power.
You have to ask yourself, are you *really* a small lightweight sports car kinda guy, or are you a musclecar kinda guy. From the statement above, obviously you're a musclecar guy!
So get a used GT500, throw on a smaller pulley, add nitrous and be done with it!
Or get a C6 Z06 and supercharge it!
I love light weight cars but lets face it as soon as I hit the gas if I'm bored from that point forward until I brake well I'm missing half the fun. I like having as much fun getting out of the corner as getting into the corner.
There are already a NUMBER of cars on the market for those who care a lot more about outright acceleration performance than light weight.
Frankly I have no idea why with your criteria you would be interested in even a 350-400hp RX-7.
02-14-14, 12:16 PM
#1644
Senior Member
F Nissan. Let them do their Z (and I hope the next one is a lot better than the current 2-seat G37).
Let Mazda build a small, fun, lightweight minimalist fixed-roof sports car and let the chips fall where they may.
I've always tracked my cars, but I do appreciate that a stock production car doesn't have to be a track monster. I don't think a 2600 lb. RX-7 needs have the same power/weight as a Corvette or a hypothetical 8.8 lb/hp new Z. If the car looks great, is engaging and fun to drive, and doesn't cost a mint, people will buy it.
Not everybody needs to do 110+mph in the 1/4, *particularly* in their street car.
A *lot* of sports car enthusiasts simply enjoy driving around in a small, lightweight, rwd sports car with responsive handling. Myself included. I LOVE driving my S2000 and FD around even just toodling around town at lowish rpm/low power. It's FUN.
Even on curvy backroads, I seldom use anything like all the power I have available, even in the s2000. At the track, totally different story, but on the street I find very little point in pushing to 7-8/10ths (anything beyond that is GROSSLY irresponsible and stupid, accident waiting to happen) when the real interesting stuff only starts happening at 9.5-11/10ths!
There are other cars for people who have to be able to win stoplight drag races. I couldn't care less about that, even though 9999 times out of 10000 I have the car to do it with
Anyway, take your desired 2600 lb. 350-400hp $45k RX-7 (optimistic, but conceivable), subtract a rotor and or turbos knocking it down to 250hp, downsize wheels/tires/brakes to sizes approprate for the reduce power level, and bingo, you have a 2500 lb. 250hp sports car that would be an absolute HOOT to drive and could be priced in the $35k range. What's wrong with that?! A lot of people would LOVE it!
Let Mazda build a small, fun, lightweight minimalist fixed-roof sports car and let the chips fall where they may.
I've always tracked my cars, but I do appreciate that a stock production car doesn't have to be a track monster. I don't think a 2600 lb. RX-7 needs have the same power/weight as a Corvette or a hypothetical 8.8 lb/hp new Z. If the car looks great, is engaging and fun to drive, and doesn't cost a mint, people will buy it.
Not everybody needs to do 110+mph in the 1/4, *particularly* in their street car.
A *lot* of sports car enthusiasts simply enjoy driving around in a small, lightweight, rwd sports car with responsive handling. Myself included. I LOVE driving my S2000 and FD around even just toodling around town at lowish rpm/low power. It's FUN.
Even on curvy backroads, I seldom use anything like all the power I have available, even in the s2000. At the track, totally different story, but on the street I find very little point in pushing to 7-8/10ths (anything beyond that is GROSSLY irresponsible and stupid, accident waiting to happen) when the real interesting stuff only starts happening at 9.5-11/10ths!
There are other cars for people who have to be able to win stoplight drag races. I couldn't care less about that, even though 9999 times out of 10000 I have the car to do it with
Anyway, take your desired 2600 lb. 350-400hp $45k RX-7 (optimistic, but conceivable), subtract a rotor and or turbos knocking it down to 250hp, downsize wheels/tires/brakes to sizes approprate for the reduce power level, and bingo, you have a 2500 lb. 250hp sports car that would be an absolute HOOT to drive and could be priced in the $35k range. What's wrong with that?! A lot of people would LOVE it!
Last edited by ZDan; 02-14-14 at 12:41 PM.
02-14-14, 12:16 PM
#1645
That whole Drivers school/HPDE thing about "you can just let off on the straights, that's not what this is all about" is bullshit. I don't need to have 700 hp, but I expect to be still accelerating at the end of the straight before I dump on the brakes, and I expect to have to balance the car coming out of the corner on the power.
Driving a car where you're flat everywhere and need to really carry speed is it's own challenge, and I respect it, but not what I'm looking for.
02-14-14, 12:19 PM
#1646
Stop talking about a 2,600lb new rotary car, Mazda might think that is acceptable.
If the new Miata is 2,400lbs the new rotary car based off that chassis must be LIGHTER not heavier.
I love the rotary, but in production trim its only assets are light weight and compact dimensions which can help chassis dynamics.
It cannot produce power and meet emissions and be reliable. It cannot achieve good gas mileage.
Mazda can still showcase the rotary advantages by putting the rotary in the Miata chassis with a fixed roof (-100Lbs), lower engine weight (-100lbs). lower engine center of gravity, forged aluminum suspension arms (-20Lbs), CF bumper covers and fenders (-30lbs), CF fixed seats (-20lbs), flocked molded foam dash or blow molded thin plastic (-20lbs), surface treated interior instead of carpet (-10Lbs), etc.
This more focused 250hp rotary sports car could weigh 2000-2,200lbs and cost maybe $10,000 more than a Miata.
If the new Miata is 2,400lbs the new rotary car based off that chassis must be LIGHTER not heavier.
I love the rotary, but in production trim its only assets are light weight and compact dimensions which can help chassis dynamics.
It cannot produce power and meet emissions and be reliable. It cannot achieve good gas mileage.
Mazda can still showcase the rotary advantages by putting the rotary in the Miata chassis with a fixed roof (-100Lbs), lower engine weight (-100lbs). lower engine center of gravity, forged aluminum suspension arms (-20Lbs), CF bumper covers and fenders (-30lbs), CF fixed seats (-20lbs), flocked molded foam dash or blow molded thin plastic (-20lbs), surface treated interior instead of carpet (-10Lbs), etc.
This more focused 250hp rotary sports car could weigh 2000-2,200lbs and cost maybe $10,000 more than a Miata.
02-14-14, 12:20 PM
#1647
There needs to be some balance. A lotus exige is a cool car, depending on your circumstance. There is a reason though they keep adding power/boost and now you have a 260HP variant. for anyone who has done carting, Im sure youll agree it is a ton of fun! Ripping around in those little things is a blast. Now that being said, would you want one at say.. VIR? Road Atlanta? Probably not. Lightweight is a great thing but it needs some power to back it up. Ive said it over and over again that I loved my S2000 and I constantly have an eye out for another one to pop up ( I want a CR ). But that being said I do think the car needed more power. Id take another 100lb if it came with a V6 350HP variant.
02-14-14, 12:37 PM
#1648
Senior Member
So tell me this: if chevy, nissan, BMW, ford all have been able to pump out +400HP production cars then why can't mazda? Why must mazda be a paltry low power sporty car brand? Why is it that too many people can't picture a company growing and therefore pigeon hole them into a category that they were 20 years ago? Seriously it's not like Chevy/BMV/Nissan/porsche SPAWNED +400 HP cars from the day their first car rolled off the assembly line. No they evolved to what they are today.
A new RX-7 should NOT be a: 3850 lb. Camaro, 3400 lb. Corvette, 3650 lb. Mustang, 3600 lb M3, 3300 lb. 370Z, or whatever-the-lightest-weight-400hp-Porsche-weighs.
If those cars appeal to you, get one!
RX-7 should be 2800 lb. MAXIMUM above all, and preferably in the 2500-2600 lb. range (or less is better of course!). The meatheads already have any number of musclecars to choose from. Love of CHRIST let there be ONE reasonably priced reasonable-weight fixed-roof rwd sports car!
I'm all for a 350-400hp variant! But for me, weight is more critical. For the power mavens, your car already exists in various forms, don't insist that any new RX-7 be yet another one!
I think most us that are wanting a new Rx-7 would agree that if we wanted an LS motor we'd simply buy a vette. Especially now that the new stingrays have been proven to be pretty ******* awesome.
But FWIW, an LS engine in a 400-500 lb. lighter FD has its own charms over a Corvette
02-14-14, 12:42 PM
#1649
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,979
Received 2,686 Likes
on
1,901 Posts
maybe you really just want a corvette? i'm sure we could find a fat suit, and some bad shorts?
02-14-14, 12:48 PM
#1650
Senior Member