honda rotary?
07-06-2006, 09:57 PM
#52
Originally Posted by Ike
Why would Honda even consider it if they could? They already have an engine that puts out more horsepower than any N/A rotary Mazda has developed. It also can rev as high as the Renesis (the 2L version), gets better gas mileage, and weighs about the same.
Because you wouldn't have to do much research to find out that a quasi turbine is more effecint than the triangle design and almost polution free!
http://www.quasiturbine.com/
There's your ga milage and RWHP increase.
Last edited by Razz1; 07-07-2006 at 12:03 AM.
07-06-2006, 11:45 PM
#53
rotorized!!!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 653
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah, and don't forget the fact that the quasiturbine doesn't work, they claim all kinds of fantastic stuff about it, but when they tried to make one run it just sat there and didn't do anything for 40 hours, and in traditional french style they stopped testing it and continue to claim it's the best thing in the world. Plus, the quasiturbine has at least 3 times more moving parts than a wankel. I'd pay good money to see their photo-detonation engine blow itself apart on the first test 
It's an elegant and ingenious design, but non-operative none the less.
btw razz, I think the s on your keyboard is busted
It's an elegant and ingenious design, but non-operative none the less.
btw razz, I think the s on your keyboard is busted
Last edited by daisuke; 07-06-2006 at 11:48 PM.
07-07-2006, 12:23 AM
#54
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
What the hell are you talking about? The F20C redlines at 9,000rpms just like the Renesis. It also has a fuel cut above that 9k reline, just like the Renesis... You need to learn how to understand the magazines you're getting your info from because the RX-8 produces max horsepower at 8500 vs. the S2K @8300, that's NOT the redline, nor is it a bad thing. If you weren't so blinded by your zealotry you'd see that I said it weighs "about the same" as the Renesis, not less. The F20C is about 20lbs heavier fully dressed (FYI the Renesis doesn't weigh under 250 dressed). It is also compact enough to sit entirely behind the front axle of the S2K just like the Renesis.
Not taking anything away from the Renesis, but the F20C is damn impressive and only a fanboi such as yourself would discount it.
Not taking anything away from the Renesis, but the F20C is damn impressive and only a fanboi such as yourself would discount it.
This is exactly what the renesis has over the Honda. Road and Track’s ’04 S2K and RX8 comparo said “with such even torque delivery and so linear a horsepower curve, it's easy to imagine limitless engine revs. This is where the RX-8 and the similarly revvy S2000 differ. Even at 8500 rpm, there's nothing to indicate the RX-8's engine is strained or that power will ever cease, except for that reminder tone.”
Oh, and your facts are wrong. The 2L Honda redlines at 8800 rpm, the 2.2L redlines at 8200. And yes, the 2.2 often dynos at just over 200whp, but the 2.0 does not. Regardless, its your selective use of the best attributes of two Honda engines vs. the one Mazda engine that perplexes me, or usage of such terms as “about the same” only when it is not favouring the 8.
You're funny that way...like a clown funny.
07-07-2006, 12:25 AM
#55
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
Nah, I'm done unless he wants to get his facts straight and actually have an intelligent debate without the namecalling.
07-07-2006, 02:19 AM
#56
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 9291150
I don’t discount Honda engines. My Honda sportbike makes over 160hp per litre at 12000 rpm in a reliable and tractable manner. They are masters at small displacement piston engines. But they are so ruthlessly efficient that they often lack in character, there is nothing cerebral about them. I also have a BMW boxer twin that puts out half the horsepower, but is way more engaging.
This is exactly what the renesis has over the Honda. Road and Track’s ’04 S2K and RX8 comparo said “with such even torque delivery and so linear a horsepower curve, it's easy to imagine limitless engine revs. This is where the RX-8 and the similarly revvy S2000 differ. Even at 8500 rpm, there's nothing to indicate the RX-8's engine is strained or that power will ever cease, except for that reminder tone.”
Oh, and your facts are wrong. The 2L Honda redlines at 8800 rpm, the 2.2L redlines at 8200. And yes, the 2.2 often dynos at just over 200whp, but the 2.0 does not. Regardless, its your selective use of the best attributes of two Honda engines vs. the one Mazda engine that perplexes me, or usage of such terms as “about the same” only when it is not favouring the 8.
You're funny that way...like a clown funny.
This is exactly what the renesis has over the Honda. Road and Track’s ’04 S2K and RX8 comparo said “with such even torque delivery and so linear a horsepower curve, it's easy to imagine limitless engine revs. This is where the RX-8 and the similarly revvy S2000 differ. Even at 8500 rpm, there's nothing to indicate the RX-8's engine is strained or that power will ever cease, except for that reminder tone.”
Oh, and your facts are wrong. The 2L Honda redlines at 8800 rpm, the 2.2L redlines at 8200. And yes, the 2.2 often dynos at just over 200whp, but the 2.0 does not. Regardless, its your selective use of the best attributes of two Honda engines vs. the one Mazda engine that perplexes me, or usage of such terms as “about the same” only when it is not favouring the 8.
You're funny that way...like a clown funny.
Here's a quote for you from Autocar...
"The turbine hum of the engine, the fabulous gearchange and the peculiarly flat delivery are fascinating. But extracting the max out of it end's up being a cold and cerebral excercise..."
That's the funny thing about opinions... My original post in this thread had nothing to do with whether the S2K or the RX-8 was a better car, nor whether the F20C is better than the Renesis. Though it seems pretty clear to me that Honda would not really benefit from having an engine like the Renesis since they already have the F20C/F22C.
I've actually driven the S2K a few times (something tells me you haven't), and I could have sworn it redlined at 9000 and many sources say it does. I guess my eyes deceived me as have all the people that refer to the redline as being 9k, even S2000 owners do it. However, you're still wrong, the F20C redlines at 8900 and the F22C redlines at 8000. There have been several pre '04 S2000s that dyno over 200whp, 195-200whp is common an a dynojet. Still more than all but 1 RX-8 dyno I've ever seen. So what the hell is your point?
I wasn't being selective, nor was I slamming the Renesis in any way. I was simply stating that Honda already has a small lightweight engine that revs high and makes a good amount of horsepower in NA form while still being pretty economical. Why would they need to develop a rotary? You've done nothing to refute that point and have created some straw man in my argument to attack.
Also, all this talk on these forums about where the engine is positioned, 50/50 being the best weight distribution, inertia this inertia that. Yes, they will have an effect on how a car handles but in the end It's a bunch of bullshit that marketing execs use to make something sound special. The only thing that really matters is how the car drives, and in the case both the S2K and RX-8 are excellent. However, if everyone bought into that nonsense marketing there would be no Evo, no STI, no Ferrari 360, no Elise, no 911, and the list goes on and on.
Stop being such a fanboi and getting defensive every time I make a post. There is no need to come at me the way you do and create all this stupid drama. Stop reading into what I type and simply read what I type. Or better yet, put me on ignore. Thanks!
Last edited by Ike; 07-07-2006 at 02:22 AM.
07-07-2006, 03:48 AM
#57
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Shropshire, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
I apologize, your statement was amusing and i got carried away. I guess it's just that some people around me think just like you posted.
07-07-2006, 03:54 AM
#58
1.21 Jiggawatts
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lima, OH
Posts: 1,330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Honda were to make a rotary...i wouldn't own it solely because of the fact that it's a Honda.
As nice of vehicles as they make, i'm pretty sick of their "my vehicle trumpts all" ego that people have seemingly formulated about them.
Take for instance the when they came out with their first pickup. Bam...it's the truck of the year. I mean, WTF. I don't think my dissapointment even calls for further explanation there.
They may be nice cars and all, but I hate the way the masses are running to them as if they were handed down from God. Don't get me wrong...cause i don't despise Hondas. I actaully like the S2000 for it's high points. I'm just not a fan of blindly running towards the light because everyone else has. One of these days their gonna find a train on the other end...
As nice of vehicles as they make, i'm pretty sick of their "my vehicle trumpts all" ego that people have seemingly formulated about them.
Take for instance the when they came out with their first pickup. Bam...it's the truck of the year. I mean, WTF. I don't think my dissapointment even calls for further explanation there.
They may be nice cars and all, but I hate the way the masses are running to them as if they were handed down from God. Don't get me wrong...cause i don't despise Hondas. I actaully like the S2000 for it's high points. I'm just not a fan of blindly running towards the light because everyone else has. One of these days their gonna find a train on the other end...
07-07-2006, 07:31 AM
#59
lurking
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's funny, but it was mentioned earlier that a '98 prelude was causing a lot of trouble. I happen to have a '98 prelude myself and it's been flawless! It's a fantastic car, one of the best FWD cars i have driven. However, it is still not as fun as my 16 year old RX7.
Long live the rotary.
Long live the rotary.
07-07-2006, 08:46 AM
#61
...Hello again Officer...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I loved my Prelude, I still love them. It is hands down the best FWD car I have ever owned. The car did have issues though...and some of those issues may have been exacerbated by the service the car received in Honda's hands around here. If you have a 5th Gen then you probably know all about the timing belt tensioner going bad. When I had it replaced in my car I asked for the waterpump, cam seals, and all belts to be replaced since they were doing the labor for it anyway. After getting my car back that day ($900), within 15 minutes the car overheated. This car never had an issue like this before they touched the coolant system, and this was just after spending half an hour listening to how they "distinctly remember" me not giving them the fob for my car alarm , only to find it in pieces in their garage. Another 600 dollars later, the car ran properly.
Only a month later I was leaking oil.....from what was supposed to be my NEW cam seal..which turned out to be my OLD one. And the leak was causing my timing belt to "slide" along the cam gears and chew itself up. This is the crap I'm talking about.
At a certain point you just have to evaluate what fiscally makes sense...and trusting my daily driver to this kind of customer service is just too costly. I would much rather give a different company a clean chance with me than continuously return to service departments that I KNOW are not on the up and up.
Again, this is my specific car, and my specific experience where I live with half a dozen different dealerships. I'm not saying this should apply to all dealers by any stretch. I just had to make my decision based on the experience I had.
Only a month later I was leaking oil.....from what was supposed to be my NEW cam seal..which turned out to be my OLD one. And the leak was causing my timing belt to "slide" along the cam gears and chew itself up. This is the crap I'm talking about.
At a certain point you just have to evaluate what fiscally makes sense...and trusting my daily driver to this kind of customer service is just too costly. I would much rather give a different company a clean chance with me than continuously return to service departments that I KNOW are not on the up and up.
Again, this is my specific car, and my specific experience where I live with half a dozen different dealerships. I'm not saying this should apply to all dealers by any stretch. I just had to make my decision based on the experience I had.
07-07-2006, 09:08 AM
#63
WWFSMD?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
The F20C redlines at 9,000rpms just like the Renesis.
{snip}
The F20C is about 20lbs heavier fully dressed (FYI the Renesis doesn't weigh under 250 dressed). It is also compact enough to sit entirely behind the front axle of the S2K just like the Renesis.
{snip}
routinely dynos about 20whp higher than the RX-8.
{snip}
The F20C is about 20lbs heavier fully dressed (FYI the Renesis doesn't weigh under 250 dressed). It is also compact enough to sit entirely behind the front axle of the S2K just like the Renesis.
{snip}
routinely dynos about 20whp higher than the RX-8.
Compared to the 13B-MSP, Ike is correct in that it gets better fuel economy (generally 2 to 5 more MPG) while making slightly more power (from the dynos I've read about, it's typically 10 more rwhp). I believe its emissions are also better than the rotary's.
However, it's noteworthy that the 13B-MSP is significantly shorter and sits much lower in the RX8 than the F20C sits in the S2000. The F20C is also a bit longer than the 13B-MSP.
Both engines are hand-built, but the F20C is more expensive... it costs more to assemble a piston engine by hand, and the F20C has lots of expensive parts with very fine tolerances.
The 13B-MSP makes a bit more torque than the S2k's 2.0L (and slightly less than the S2k's 2.2L).
Also, the 13B-MSP is smoother and happier to rev... and not to nitpick over insignificant details, but the 2.0L S2k actually redlines at 8900.
Lastly, I've read in a few places that the F20C is 326 pounds vs 262 pounds for the 13B-MSP (both fully dressed). Ike, you stated that the F20C is 20 pounds heavier... what weight are you going by for these engines?
07-07-2006, 11:20 AM
#64
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
Uhh, saying "there is nothing cerebral" about Honda engines is a compliment. You might want to look up the use of that word. To call the S2000 or the F20C cerebral is idiotic, they're anything but. The RX-8 on the otherhand is a bit more cerebral than the S2K, it's more predictable and reving to 9k is pretty uneventful.
Here's a quote for you from Autocar...
"The turbine hum of the engine, the fabulous gearchange and the peculiarly flat delivery are fascinating. But extracting the max out of it end's up being a cold and cerebral excercise..."
That's the funny thing about opinions... My original post in this thread had nothing to do with whether the S2K or the RX-8 was a better car, nor whether the F20C is better than the Renesis. Though it seems pretty clear to me that Honda would not really benefit from having an engine like the Renesis since they already have the F20C/F22C.
I've actually driven the S2K a few times (something tells me you haven't), and I could have sworn it redlined at 9000 and many sources say it does. I guess my eyes deceived me as have all the people that refer to the redline as being 9k, even S2000 owners do it. However, you're still wrong, the F20C redlines at 8900 and the F22C redlines at 8000. There have been several pre '04 S2000s that dyno over 200whp, 195-200whp is common an a dynojet. Still more than all but 1 RX-8 dyno I've ever seen. So what the hell is your point?
I wasn't being selective, nor was I slamming the Renesis in any way. I was simply stating that Honda already has a small lightweight engine that revs high and makes a good amount of horsepower in NA form while still being pretty economical. Why would they need to develop a rotary? You've done nothing to refute that point and have created some straw man in my argument to attack.
Also, all this talk on these forums about where the engine is positioned, 50/50 being the best weight distribution, inertia this inertia that. Yes, they will have an effect on how a car handles but in the end It's a bunch of bullshit that marketing execs use to make something sound special. The only thing that really matters is how the car drives, and in the case both the S2K and RX-8 are excellent. However, if everyone bought into that nonsense marketing there would be no Evo, no STI, no Ferrari 360, no Elise, no 911, and the list goes on and on.
Stop being such a fanboi and getting defensive every time I make a post. There is no need to come at me the way you do and create all this stupid drama. Stop reading into what I type and simply read what I type. Or better yet, put me on ignore. Thanks!
Here's a quote for you from Autocar...
"The turbine hum of the engine, the fabulous gearchange and the peculiarly flat delivery are fascinating. But extracting the max out of it end's up being a cold and cerebral excercise..."
That's the funny thing about opinions... My original post in this thread had nothing to do with whether the S2K or the RX-8 was a better car, nor whether the F20C is better than the Renesis. Though it seems pretty clear to me that Honda would not really benefit from having an engine like the Renesis since they already have the F20C/F22C.
I've actually driven the S2K a few times (something tells me you haven't), and I could have sworn it redlined at 9000 and many sources say it does. I guess my eyes deceived me as have all the people that refer to the redline as being 9k, even S2000 owners do it. However, you're still wrong, the F20C redlines at 8900 and the F22C redlines at 8000. There have been several pre '04 S2000s that dyno over 200whp, 195-200whp is common an a dynojet. Still more than all but 1 RX-8 dyno I've ever seen. So what the hell is your point?
I wasn't being selective, nor was I slamming the Renesis in any way. I was simply stating that Honda already has a small lightweight engine that revs high and makes a good amount of horsepower in NA form while still being pretty economical. Why would they need to develop a rotary? You've done nothing to refute that point and have created some straw man in my argument to attack.
Also, all this talk on these forums about where the engine is positioned, 50/50 being the best weight distribution, inertia this inertia that. Yes, they will have an effect on how a car handles but in the end It's a bunch of bullshit that marketing execs use to make something sound special. The only thing that really matters is how the car drives, and in the case both the S2K and RX-8 are excellent. However, if everyone bought into that nonsense marketing there would be no Evo, no STI, no Ferrari 360, no Elise, no 911, and the list goes on and on.
Stop being such a fanboi and getting defensive every time I make a post. There is no need to come at me the way you do and create all this stupid drama. Stop reading into what I type and simply read what I type. Or better yet, put me on ignore. Thanks!
-“in the end, (physics) is a bunch of bullshit that marketing execs use” …allrighty then
-you actually put your Evo in the same line as a Ferrari 360, 911, Elise …'tis funny
-I noticed you restated your original statement, maybe you finally realized you were wrong when you first stated the Honda engine revs “as high” and weighs “about the same”
--thanks for the attempt at an English lesson, but cerebral IS in the right context when I suggested that the Honda does not connect to the senses like a rotary does
…so, lets move on.
07-07-2006, 12:41 PM
#65
Registered
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Milan, Michigan
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
What the hell are you talking about? The F20C redlines at 9,000rpms just like the Renesis. It also has a fuel cut above that 9k reline, just like the Renesis... You need to learn how to understand the magazines you're getting your info from because the RX-8 produces max horsepower at 8500 vs. the S2K @8300, that's NOT the redline, nor is it a bad thing. If you weren't so blinded by your zealotry you'd see that I said it weighs "about the same" as the Renesis, not less. The F20C is about 20lbs heavier fully dressed (FYI the Renesis doesn't weigh under 250 dressed). It is also compact enough to sit entirely behind the front axle of the S2K just like the Renesis.
In addition, the F20C won its class in the International Engine of the year awards 5 years in a row. The S2K is considered one of the most reliable cars on the road by various sources, and routinely dynos about 20whp higher than the RX-8. So unless you want to claim some nonsense about massive drivetrain loss in the RX-8 it makes more horsepower. If that's not good enough for you it's even rated higher from the factory than the Renesis.
Not taking anything away from the Renesis, but the F20C is damn impressive and only a fanboi such as yourself would discount it.
In addition, the F20C won its class in the International Engine of the year awards 5 years in a row. The S2K is considered one of the most reliable cars on the road by various sources, and routinely dynos about 20whp higher than the RX-8. So unless you want to claim some nonsense about massive drivetrain loss in the RX-8 it makes more horsepower. If that's not good enough for you it's even rated higher from the factory than the Renesis.
Not taking anything away from the Renesis, but the F20C is damn impressive and only a fanboi such as yourself would discount it.
07-07-2006, 03:07 PM
#68
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Deslock
I'm a huge fan of the S2000 and its 2.0L F20C (I've been lucky enough to drive one a few times).
Compared to the 13B-MSP, Ike is correct in that it gets better fuel economy (generally 2 to 5 more MPG) while making slightly more power (from the dynos I've read about, it's typically 10 more rwhp). I believe its emissions are also better than the rotary's.
However, it's noteworthy that the 13B-MSP is significantly shorter and sits much lower in the RX8 than the F20C sits in the S2000. The F20C is also a bit longer than the 13B-MSP.
Both engines are hand-built, but the F20C is more expensive... it costs more to assemble a piston engine by hand, and the F20C has lots of expensive parts with very fine tolerances.
The 13B-MSP makes a bit more torque than the S2k's 2.0L (and slightly less than the S2k's 2.2L).
Also, the 13B-MSP is smoother and happier to rev... and not to nitpick over insignificant details, but the 2.0L S2k actually redlines at 8900.
Lastly, I've read in a few places that the F20C is 326 pounds vs 262 pounds for the 13B-MSP (both fully dressed). Ike, you stated that the F20C is 20 pounds heavier... what weight are you going by for these engines?
Compared to the 13B-MSP, Ike is correct in that it gets better fuel economy (generally 2 to 5 more MPG) while making slightly more power (from the dynos I've read about, it's typically 10 more rwhp). I believe its emissions are also better than the rotary's.
However, it's noteworthy that the 13B-MSP is significantly shorter and sits much lower in the RX8 than the F20C sits in the S2000. The F20C is also a bit longer than the 13B-MSP.
Both engines are hand-built, but the F20C is more expensive... it costs more to assemble a piston engine by hand, and the F20C has lots of expensive parts with very fine tolerances.
The 13B-MSP makes a bit more torque than the S2k's 2.0L (and slightly less than the S2k's 2.2L).
Also, the 13B-MSP is smoother and happier to rev... and not to nitpick over insignificant details, but the 2.0L S2k actually redlines at 8900.
Lastly, I've read in a few places that the F20C is 326 pounds vs 262 pounds for the 13B-MSP (both fully dressed). Ike, you stated that the F20C is 20 pounds heavier... what weight are you going by for these engines?
I've also seen the 302 lb. number tossed around for fully dressed.
07-07-2006, 03:43 PM
#69
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 9291150
You can’t be ignored, you are freak’n everywhere here! As long as you are an Evo fanbois on a RX8 site I’ll be a RX8 fanbois on a RX8 site. Otherwise, let me understand your points…
-“in the end, (physics) is a bunch of bullshit that marketing execs use” …allrighty then
-you actually put your Evo in the same line as a Ferrari 360, 911, Elise …'tis funny
-I noticed you restated your original statement, maybe you finally realized you were wrong when you first stated the Honda engine revs “as high” and weighs “about the same”
--thanks for the attempt at an English lesson, but cerebral IS in the right context when I suggested that the Honda does not connect to the senses like a rotary does
…so, lets move on.
-“in the end, (physics) is a bunch of bullshit that marketing execs use” …allrighty then
-you actually put your Evo in the same line as a Ferrari 360, 911, Elise …'tis funny
-I noticed you restated your original statement, maybe you finally realized you were wrong when you first stated the Honda engine revs “as high” and weighs “about the same”
--thanks for the attempt at an English lesson, but cerebral IS in the right context when I suggested that the Honda does not connect to the senses like a rotary does
…so, lets move on.
2.) Yes I did, it's one of the best handling cars in the world, especially for the price.
3.) Nope, just trying to make it sink into your thick skull. Yes, the Renesis redline is 100rpms higher than the F20C. It only took you getting the redline of the F20C and F22C wrong 3 or 4 times to come to that conclusion.
4.) "There is nothing cerebral about them" was used in reference to a Honda engine. You just keep using cerebral as meaning something that connects to the senses...
Pretty weak man, I refuted just about everything you've said and you come back with this... I would suggest you do move on because this isn't an argument you're winning.
07-07-2006, 03:47 PM
#70
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Raptor2k
07-07-2006, 08:15 PM
#71
WWFSMD?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...dressed+weight
I've also seen the 302 lb. number tossed around for fully dressed.
I've also seen the 302 lb. number tossed around for fully dressed.
I'd be surprised if the 13B-MSP weighs 40 pounds more than the 13B, so I'm skeptical about the numbers in the thread that you linked to... where else have you seen the 302 number tossed around?
07-07-2006, 10:35 PM
#72
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Red Devil
That handful of popcorn from last time just wouldn't do. I wonder what would happen if you two met in person?
