Build Thread 1978 Mercury Cyclone. The pig is in the pen.

90sickfox · Dec 27, 2017

That really sucks. I had an issue with a machine shop called S & S in Baltimore once. They stood behind their work. I didn't pay a dime for anything....even gaskets....and they had the engine back in my hands in 2 days.

I really dislike people that don't stand behind the work their employees do. He has a chance to make it good...and I hope he does.

Bullitt347 · Dec 27, 2017

There is a reason I drive 250 miles one way to "my" machinist. And I live 20 miles from Seattle. "My" guy stands behind his work 100% no ifs, ands or buts. 3 years at 1,200 hp and not one issue. Gotta love it.

CarMichael Angelo · Dec 27, 2017

This isn't the first fck up that has come from this shop....When I had them mill down the pedestals on the head, and tap the bosses for 3/8" screw in studs, the end result was soooo fcked up I had to go up to a 7/16 stud to allow them the room to fix the "off line" orientation of the studs. The springs were incorrectly assembled,....I had to take the head elsewhere to have him recheck, and reassemble the head.

I've already done the local high dollar shop here in the city w/ one of my previous race engine builds.....the machine bill exceeded the parts bill,....in one instance the head gasket didn't seal ( because they didn't have the ability to deck the block smooth enough). The next time, (different engine), the crank trigger was so far off, we had to reset the position of the sensor to get the thing to make enough power to make one pound of boost. (This was in lieu of the fact that I paid these guys to totally assemble, and run the engine in.)
As for the current machine shop....
I've used these guys before in the distant past, and on a previous project, argued with them over what a 3 angle valve job is....I just figured that after 10 years, they'd have figured that sht out.

I feel like this guy knows that they did this...I think that they'll make it right...The only concern is that whenever a shop has to fix their own fck up,...They do it on their own time.

droopie85gt · Dec 27, 2017

It's hard to find competent people in just about any field these days who are honest and stand behind their work. So of the best people are the worst off because they give so much of their time away. Some of the worst heads are rich because they nickle and dime you to death for everything they do, even if they screw it up.

hoopty5.0 · Dec 27, 2017

Man that sucks. Really sorry to hear that Mike.

xecute · Dec 28, 2017

madmike1157 said:
This isn't the first fck up that has come from this shop....When I had them mill down the pedestals on the head, and tap the bosses for 3/8" screw in studs, the end result was soooo fcked up I had to go up to a 7/16 stud to allow them the room to fix the "off line" orientation of the studs. The springs were incorrectly assembled,....I had to take the head elsewhere to have him recheck, and reassemble the head.

I've already done the local high dollar shop here in the city w/ one of my previous race engine builds.....the machine bill exceeded the parts bill,....in one instance the head gasket didn't seal ( because they didn't have the ability to deck the block smooth enough). The next time, (different engine), the crank trigger was so far off, we had to reset the position of the sensor to get the thing to make enough power to make one pound of boost. (This was in lieu of the fact that I paid these guys to totally assemble, and run the engine in.)
As for the current machine shop....
I've used these guys before in the distant past, and on a previous project, argued with them over what a 3 angle valve job is....I just figured that after 10 years, they'd have figured that sht out.

I feel like this guy knows that they did this...I think that they'll make it right...The only concern is that whenever a shop has to fix their own fck up,...They do it on their own time.

Its okay. You just get the work done, and in another 300000 miles, go to a Diesel Mechanic. They do sleeves and alloy head studs all the time. I got all my info from my Diesel Machanic at my former work, they did rebuilds all the time. It's like this, anyone can make a mistake, to err is human, but how do they make good when it happens. The first is random, the second, its the begining of a pattern.....If failure wasn't an option, what would you do it it was your Helicoptor. Thankfully, its not a helicopter, despite its Gasturbine engine sharing its combustion chamber with a hoary old 250 Maverick engine.....

If you had a GM 4200 or an LS2 engine, you'd be pi55ed off if they did that, because sleeved engines are really common, and alloy blocked sleeved engines need a he|| of a lot more care than an iron in line six.

Noobz347 · Dec 28, 2017

After all of that description, I am really surprised that the block isn't ruined. (knock on wood)

CarMichael Angelo · Dec 28, 2017

xecute said:
Its okay. You just get the work done, and in another 300000 miles, go to a Diesel Mechanic. They do sleeves and alloy head studs all the time. I got all my info from my Diesel Machanic at my former work, they did rebuilds all the time. It's like this, anyone can make a mistake, to err is human, but how do they make good when it happens. The first is random, the second, its the begining of a pattern.....If failure wasn't an option, what would you do it it was your Helicoptor. Thankfully, its not a helicopter, despite its Gasturbine engine sharing its combustion chamber with a hoary old 250 Maverick engine.....

If you had a GM 4200 or an LS2 engine, you'd be pi55ed off if they did that, because sleeved engines are really common, and alloy blocked sleeved engines need a he|| of a lot more care than an iron in line six.

They are a diesel machine shop. There are various monster diesel blocks( literally) all over that shop. I chose them initially back in 15 because of their familiarity with the process. I realize that anybody can make a mistake,.. I'm just glad I caught it, and I'm hoping that they'll fix this, and I'll come out of this auto-rotation landing in one piece.

Noobz347 said:
After all of that description, I am really surprised that the block isn't ruined. (knock on wood)

Funny you should say that...I was awake at 2 AM, thinking/worrying about that very thing.....

Installing the sleeves requires a huge over bore...(I think it was .181 last time) the sleeve they install has a .090 wall, but the finish bore of that sleeve is 3.680........( Which is stock 250 bore). ....You can't get a good ring set for a 3.680 piston, so they over bore the new sleeve .020 to 3.700, solely for that reason. ( Which is why I have a 3.700 bore piston) Doing that leaves a .070 thick cylinder wall + what ever remained of the original cylinder after it was hogged out.
At 2 AM,...You wonder what that does to your deck integrity......You wonder how many times this process can be repeated..( indefinitely?) You wonder if this time, you'll have a leak. You wonder if they shouldn't have to deck the block after that process.......rational thought being that there would be some need for that, after all 6 holes were violated to that extent. You wonder if they have to deck it,..and if they do, how far out of the hole your piston will stick up, considering the last time this was done, the block was zero decked.
Then you wonder how much compression will be added to that as a result.

The last time I did this, the block was short filled before the sleeving process. I filled it to just below the water pump opening..the bottom of the cylinder that the sleeve sits on is completely buried in block cement. At the top though,...you can see that sleeve..

It don't look like much....and I wonder what keeps water from getting by it there? There has to be remaining cylinder wall between the sleeve, and the water jacket..else wise I'd have a leak there I'd imagine.

droopie85gt · Dec 28, 2017

The 2AM worrying. I hate that! It ruins a perfectly good night's sleep! Hopefully the machine shop will let you know all those details soon.

Noobz347 · Dec 28, 2017

I'm pretty sure that so long as the block is not bored over tolerance, the end result is probably more substantial than the bare bore.

Bullitt347 · Dec 28, 2017

Just found this, may be to late to help, or it may be no help.

http://www.fordmuscle.com/tech-stories/the-secrets-to-file-fitting-piston-rings-successfully/

CarMichael Angelo · Dec 28, 2017

Ok.
Just spoke to the machine shop. He isn't gonna have the engine back to me before the first of the year.

I did learn that more than one cylinder had so much taper
( .003-.004") that he is gonna sleeve all 6. At .003, the ring end gap would've closed up as much as .015". In retrospect, the fact that the ring end gaps were set so loosely by me in the first place probably was a good thing.
I didn't consider it at the teardown, but the side of the piston skirts show significant scuffing...they were way too tight too.
So then....I guess that I dodged a bullet here....one that could have done way more damage had I let it run its course..(even though I had no idea that I was saving the engine when I decided to do the tear down)

xecute · Dec 28, 2017

Diesel guys rock. I like to step bore, and like to put a block plate on a sleeved engine. Dry sleeves are okay, wet sleeves are much more risky.

I kind of remember what we discussed. Recap on the advice I gave back in 2014.

Down here in Hamilton Jet equiped Jet Sprint engines, pop top high compression pistons were illegal in most classes, so they decked the hell out of the factory iron six and eight cylinder blocks, and ran a copper head gasket with a reprofiled stock piston.

If thinwall, you could always sleeve an engine if it was rare. The normal rule was over bore 250 thou and use a 125 thou thick sleeve for 3.3 Vauxhall in line sixes, to get back to the stock 3.625" bore. It was a very common Hamilton Jet and oval track engine, and they got sleeved on occasion. You could over bore them to 3.700" or so, and thats 87.5 thou thick between rebored cylinde sleeve to to the piston ring. Allways, somewhere, the sleeve was protecting a major crack or score. The over boring process on a thinwall 1978 engine is taking out metal in an area that is at best 130 thou thick, sometimes 90 thou. That 90 thou is certainly the case with 90% of all Cleveland 351's that have been sleeved. Hell, Ford Australia sleeved the 76 to 82 modle year blocks from the factory to recover the casting cost of an engine, and sold them to customers that way. Mainly due to core shift.

In those cases, the cylinder wall would have been daylighted and metal woould have clear air in certained places before the liner was popped in. That is okay as long as somewhere in the thrust face, there is 180 thou of metal supported. Normally, shell molded thinwall engines have egg shaped section, and they are thicker at the suporting bulkheads, and tapper down the 5-1/2 or so inches of cylinder to a minimum 130 or sometimes 90 thou with core shifting thickness. And core shifting can be 50 thou or more. The spun cast liner is very strong, stronger than a cast iron block, but any time you remove cast iron, you lesson the chance of the liner doing its job.

On the L28's and LD28 diesels, the factory sleeve kits were only 103 thou thick for a start, and the second or third rebuilds on the sleeved engine could end up 60 thou over, taking wall thickness down to 73 thou. You can go another 20 thou over from your current +20, about +40 thou is as much as I'd risk, but your block is hardfilled, so its not an issue really.

Liner shifting due to water ingress or overheating is so uncommon in an iron engine.

According to
How to Power Tune Rover V8 Engines for Road & Track
By Des Hammill, Veloce Publishing Ltd, 2005 ISBN 1903706173, 9781903706176 and 216 pages long

The reliable replacement thinwall liners are just 55 thou thick after machining to 3.702" in a bored out 3.5 Rover block.

Stock, the very unreliable liner is 91 thou thick wall for the 3.702" 3.9 liter Block.

page 44 to 45.

That is in an aluminum block, Mike, so if its cast iron, hardfilled and over bored, you can over bore to a 305 Chevy piston and still have about 55 thou of wall thinkness.

This is what I based my liner around, the prospect of saving any iron 200 or 250 Ford block using the common GM 4200 or Rover 3.5 style liners, and the common 3.625 or maybee 3.756 pistons, and having it survive three 30 thou over bores, +30, +60, +90. Its possiable!

Back in 1985 to 1994 when I had it, everyone suggested I used a Rover 3500 or Buick-Olds-Pontiac 215 in my old 58 PA Vauxhall, but that engine isn't something that mechanically locks its iron liner to the aluminum block. Either the B-O-P 215 cast in liner isn't inbeded, or the later Rover 3.5/3.9/4.2/4.6 shrink fit liner moves under overheating and heat gasket failure.

Collateral damage at normal rates is up to 3 to 4 Grand US to preheat, remove liners, quench and reheat and replace. Its the same with the alloy LS Chevies. Some just bore out the existing block with the liner still partly in.

That's why I'm a Cast Iron Charlie all the way. Alloy sux dead Cats and dead 215's and dead LS engines

Aren't you glad you used a junked 78 Maverick 250, you cheep a$$ed tight wad?

See the maladies of the 3.5 litRE "Wover Vee Eight"....http://forum.britishv8.org/read.php?6,18390

I have little respect for English re-engineering. The Rover 3500 was better than the US 215, but it still had some blQQdt stupid engineering stuff ups.

You will never have a slipped liner, and the liners can be replaced much cheeper on an irin in line six than this 3.5 liter Rover with a moved liner

[B said:
kenzmyth[/B]]
...my ordeal with a 3.5 Liter block that has a newly discovered slipped cylinder liner on #1.
My question is: Can this block be repaired? IF so, what company can do the work and what would it cost?

View: https://vimeo.com/14816047

[B said:
DiDueColpi[/B] Fred Key]
Hey Ken, "good on ya mate" for doing up those videos. We need more of that sort of thing to keep our sport healthy.
The more information that we have out there regarding our hobby/sport/ passion/illness/reason for sleeping on the sofa, the better off we are.
If you're up to it I have some suggestions for you to consider for your productions.

Regarding the slipped liner. Just because the 3.5 doesn't share the romance of it's bigger brothers doesn't mean that it can't be a happy little motor.
As I see it you have several viable options. One is to repair the current liner. If you flip the block over you will find that all the liners except 1 and 8 register into a ledge in the main bearing webs. This is good. 1 and 8 register into a small tab cast into the bottom of the block. It's like trying to hold onto the liner with your fingernails. This is bad. It's no wonder that 1 and 8 tend to be the ones that move.
Option one. I would heat the block and press the liners out, clean everything up, reheat the block coat everything with loctite and press them back in. Once in place pin them like Nic did and your good to go. This could all be done in your living room with a Fisher Price carpentry set and a campfire.
Option two.If your tired of seeing your machinist with his "will work for food" sign then this option might be up your alley. This involves replacing the liners with new ones. At this point you might as well go big. The cost is the same no matter what size you choose and you need new pistons anyway. The trick with this one is to have the block step bored at the bottom to give the liners something to sit on. Your machinist should be very comfortable with this procedure as it's a common operation on an iron block.
It should also be the same price or cheaper. The aluminum is easier on his tools and it cuts faster. Cost up here in Vancouver is around $ 800.00 including liners and decking.
Option three. The ultimate solution as Art said, is a bottle of Jack Daniels... I mean tophat liners. But be carefull!!!!
Your machinist needs to know his stuff, he better because he can afford a holiday on this one. The register on the top of the block must have a chamfer. This is often not done and causes the "brim" to crack. The liner itself must be top quality, again because of the brim. Personal experience says don't use a steel shim gasket and don't get the engine overheated ever.
Cost ranges from "oh my god" to "are you $%###*< insane".
I prefer option two as liner sizes are myriad and it is more tolerant of heating episodes.
Anyway thats my take on it. If I've managed to muddy up the issue then my job here is done.
Cheers
Fred

CarMichael Angelo · Dec 28, 2017

xecute said:
Diesel guys rock. I like to step bore, and like to put a block plate on a sleeved engine. Dry sleeves are okay, wet sleeves are much more risky.

I kind of remember what we discussed. Recap on the advice I gave back in 2014.

Down here in Hamilton Jet equiped Jet Sprint engines, pop top high compression pistons were illegal in most classes, so they decked the hell out of the factory iron six and eight cylinder blocks, and ran a copper head gasket with a reprofiled stock piston.

If thinwall, you could always sleeve an engine if it was rare. The normal rule was over bore 250 thou and use a 125 thou thick sleeve for 3.3 Vauxhall in line sixes, to get back to the stock 3.625" bore. It was a very common Hamilton Jet and oval track engine, and they got sleeved on occasion. You could over bore them to 3.700" or so, and thats 87.5 thou thick between rebored cylinde sleeve to to the piston ring. Allways, somewhere, the sleeve was protecting a major crack or score. The over boring process on a thinwall 1978 engine is taking out metal in an area that is at best 130 thou thick, sometimes 90 thou. That 90 thou is certainly the case with 90% of all Cleveland 351's that have been sleeved. Hell, Ford Australia sleeved the 76 to 82 modle year blocks from the factory to recover the casting cost of an engine, and sold them to customers that way. Mainly due to core shift.

In those cases, the cylinder wall would have been daylighted and metal woould have clear air in certained places before the liner was popped in. That is okay as long as somewhere in the thrust face, there is 180 thou of metal supported. Normally, shell molded thinwall engines have egg shaped section, and they are thicker at the suporting bulkheads, and tapper down the 5-1/2 or so inches of cylinder to a minimum 130 or sometimes 90 thou with core shifting thickness. And core shifting can be 50 thou or more. The spun cast liner is very strong, stronger than a cast iron block, but any time you remove cast iron, you lesson the chance of the liner doing its job.

On the L28's and LD28 diesels, the factory sleeve kits were only 103 thou thick for a start, and the second or third rebuilds on the sleeved engine could end up 60 thou over, taking wall thickness down to 73 thou. You can go another 20 thou over from your current +20, about +40 thou is as much as I'd risk, but your block is hardfilled, so its not an issue really.

Liner shifting due to water ingress or overheating is so uncommon in an iron engine.

According to
How to Power Tune Rover V8 Engines for Road & Track
By Des Hammill, Veloce Publishing Ltd, 2005 ISBN 1903706173, 9781903706176 and 216 pages long

The reliable replacement thinwall liners are just 55 thou thick after machining to 3.702" in a bored out 3.5 Rover block.

Stock, the very unreliable liner is 91 thou thick wall for the 3.702" 3.9 liter Block.

page 44 to 45.

That is in an aluminum block, Mike, so if its cast iron, hardfilled and over bored, you can over bore to a 305 Chevy piston and still have about 55 thou of wall thinkness.

This is what I based my liner around, the prospect of saving any iron 200 or 250 Ford block using the common GM 4200 or Rover 3.5 style liners, and the common 3.625 or maybee 3.756 pistons, and having it survive three 30 thou over bores, +30, +60, +90. Its possiable!

Back in 1985 to 1994 when I had it, everyone suggested I used a Rover 3500 or Buick-Olds-Pontiac 215 in my old 58 PA Vauxhall, but that engine isn't something that mechanically locks its iron liner to the aluminum block. Either the B-O-P 215 cast in liner isn't inbeded, or the later Rover 3.5/3.9/4.2/4.6 shrink fit liner moves under overheating and heat gasket failure.

Collateral damage at normal rates is up to 3 to 4 Grand US to preheat, remove liners, quench and reheat and replace. Its the same with the alloy LS Chevies. Some just bore out the existing block with the liner still partly in.

That's why I'm a Cast Iron Charlie all the way. Alloy sux dead Cats and dead 215's and dead LS engines

Aren't you glad you used a junked 78 Maverick 250, you cheep a$$ed tight wad?

See the maladies of the 3.5 litRE "Wover Vee Eight"....http://forum.britishv8.org/read.php?6,18390

I have little respect for English re-engineering. The Rover 3500 was better than the US 215, but it still had some blQQdt stupid engineering stuff ups.

You will never have a slipped liner, and the liners can be replaced much cheeper on an irin in line six than this 3.5 liter Rover with a moved liner

View: https://vimeo.com/14816047

As usual after any reply from you Dean, I think it appropriate that I say........

Whaaaaa? I never know what you're on about sometimes....

You know a lot about this project of mine, maybe more than I do...so I'm gonna assume that you know that the cylinders have all already been sleeved once....

I went down there back then after the .180 overbore to see what the cylinder looked like then, and IIRC it was unremarkable. No ragged bored-through metal thinness...

( Too bad though...a 3.867 bore
Would net me a 275 c.I. engine)

Davedacarpainter · Dec 28, 2017

madmike1157 said:
Ok.
Just spoke to the machine shop. He isn't gonna have the engine back to me before the first of the year.

I did learn that more than one cylinder had so much taper
( .003-.004") that he is gonna sleeve all 6. At .003, the ring end gap would've closed up as much as .015". In retrospect, the fact that the ring end gaps were set so loosely by me in the first place probably was a good thing.
I didn't consider it at the teardown, but the side of the piston skirts show significant scuffing...they were way too tight too.
So then....I guess that I dodged a bullet here....one that could have done way more damage had I let it run its course..(even though I had no idea that I was saving the engine when I decided to do the tear down)

Well then........Yay for you Mike..............................

xecute · Dec 28, 2017

In proper American English.

You effectively have had the old stock 3.680" bore engine taken out to 3.861". The 3.9 Rover liners are shrunk fit to about 3.808-3.886" or whatever. So what you have right now is as near as dammit to 3.9 Rover spec 3.702" liners right now.They have replacement outer cylinder wall target diameters of 3.808, 3.813, 3.886" bores depending on what kind of mad stuff the Limey's did on the 3.5 or 3.9 , 4.2 or 4.6 liter V8 production line between 1965 and 2005.

With the botched machining to the liners replaced and fixed by your machinist, you can go up to 305 Chevy sized 3.756", 20 thou over pistons at some later stage if you ever want to. 55 thou wall thickness is all you need for liner stability. Thats 52.5 thou wall thickness. Enough in cast iron.

Ahem, after your 300 000 mile rebuild.

The rest is just detail. Its like Power Spectural Density Dude...just tune out the other white noise and fuzzy crud. Just look at the nice peaks and troughs, the rest is for your latter info....if you ever go back, you'll find a treasure trove of good sh!+ in post #7013

Last edited: Today at 12:08 PM

droopie85gt · Dec 30, 2017

xecute said:
In proper American English.

The rest is just detail. Its like Power Spectural Density Dude...just tune out the other white noise and fuzzy crud. Just look at the nice peaks and troughs, the rest is for your latter info....if you ever go back, you'll find a treasure trove of good sh!+ in post #7013

7013 posts...well this makes 7017. To see the Monster rise from an idea, thru fabrication to both body and engine. To a household move, home construction on the Monster Garage, to smoky burnouts and bad audio, to smoky blowby to the smoke coming out of Mike's head at the machine shop, to a big comfy lounger in his Monster Garage. These 7000 odd posts have a seen lot. I bet the most popular topic throughout the whole thing is MACHINE GUNS!

If Mike HAD mounted the machine guns, he could have taken one to the machine shop, hand held, and he would have gotten his block sleeved CORRECTLY in no time!

RaggedGT · Dec 30, 2017

Just to think-some where in the 7000 posts-was mikes original idea to drive the monster with its original carbed six banger,faded yellow paint,white wall tires, hubcaps,and the baked interior with missing taillights- just so he could build the Maverick banger to Monster Specs
I think it’s been a Great ride

CarMichael Angelo · Dec 30, 2017

Ok....for better or worse, my " idle hands" mode has kicked in. In my case, idle hands forces a re-think on currently working pieces/parts on the Monster.

I said earlier that I was considering building a "bundle of snakes" GT-40 style small plenum/long runner intake manifold as an option to the current short runner/large plenum that's on the car. The best way to describe the end result in my head is a 6 tubed equal length shorty exhaust header.
I've bought the tubing bends, they'll be here mid-week,.....I've already found some tubing sleeves that'll work as injector bungs.....I'll pick up the 1/4" plate to make the manifold flange up on Tuesday..now it's all just a matter of design theory.

I know that a long runner intake will kill off some top end, and enhance bottom end torque.....The question(s) are:

How much is it gonna hurt the top end,....and do I care? This car seems to make more than adequate low end grunt as it is, but has a marked fall off in top end pull,...but it's a street car. If I make 50 more ft-lbs of torque, and lose 50 hp as a result,...what makes for a faster car? A 350 hp/400 ft-lb, or a 300/450 version of the same?
I know that torque and hp are all relative to speed....torque will help a car accelerate more quickly, while horsepower will help a car to achieve a higher top speed. ( I could a rats red bunion hole about top speed).
Torque is gonna allow me to drop the rear gear all the way down to a 3.31 and probably go faster as a result of it.

(and I'll actually do that this time around, now that the fuel system is right)

Secondly,...If the front 3 runners end up looking like a section of the twistiest two lane road coming out of the alps, and the back three runners are almost straight shots for the sake of keeping the tubes equal in length .....Will there be distribution issues once the water meth starts entering the intake?

I'm not gonna hurt the existing manifold in anyway,...it'll go on a hook next to all of the other orphans of this build. I'll keep it just in case there is an absolute fail with the performance of the new intake.

Hopefully it'll work...I'll have Medusa with her head full of snakes on the exhaust side, and now this thing on the intake side. I'll have to get Sam Jackson to make the movie version of my "Snakes In the Hood"....Then when TBS gets it'll be:

" I'm sick and tired of these monkey fightin' snakes under this mindaybto Friday hood!!!"

jrichker · Dec 30, 2017

Your new manifold is going to look like a fireplace log with 6 branches sticking out of it by the time you get though with it. Will there be enough room to accommodate the runner length you want?

See here for help to calculate the plenum volume ...
https://www.google.com/search?ei=yM.....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.1.163....0.xi-_rR_nZV8

Build Thread 1978 Mercury Cyclone. The pig is in the pen.

Wasn't a pretty sight...and I've got big hands

I have been doing it wrong this whole time

my rearend will smell so minty fresh,

Hookers and Beer for life!

mechanicus terribilis

Eaten, greased and played with my balls

Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor

my rearend will smell so minty fresh,

Hookers and Beer for life!

Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor

I have been doing it wrong this whole time

my rearend will smell so minty fresh,

Eaten, greased and played with my balls

my rearend will smell so minty fresh,

Chicks can make things hard if they’re inspired...

Eaten, greased and played with my balls

Hookers and Beer for life!

Been here over a DECADE and still no CT

my rearend will smell so minty fresh,

StangNet's favorite TOOL

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency