|
in a SpaceX group on Facebook, someone said something about the Dragon capsule explosion along the lines of "I'm not into conspiracy theories, but a Tesla short with a gun isn't out of the realm of possibility." I think what SpaceX is doing is cool, but holy poo poo the fanboys are straight-up cultists.
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:45 |
|
|
GWBBQ posted:in a SpaceX group on Facebook, someone said something about the Dragon capsule explosion along the lines of "I'm not into conspiracy theories, but a Tesla short with a gun isn't out of the realm of possibility." I think what SpaceX is doing is cool, but holy poo poo the fanboys are straight-up cultists. SpaceX is having issues with their funding, so who knows!
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:31
|
|
|
Vomik posted:the stock price doesn’t matter concerning bankruptcy. when bear sterns filed for bankruptcy it closed the day before at like $75 and then Tuesday the following week JP buys its assets at $2 a share It does in this case because Tesla’s ability to stay afloat depends on its ability to sell stock.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:It does in this case because Tesla’s ability to stay afloat depends on its ability to sell stock. There's also the whole fact that the company lives or dies on Musk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 15:34
|
|
|
quote:A federal judge in Los Angeles on Friday denied the Tesla chief executive officer's request to dismiss Vernon Unsworth's defamation complaint. The judge said a written ruling explaining his order will come later. oops
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 16:47
|
|
|
Its been a while and since its the weekend and Tesla cant gently caress up much more at the stock exhange today, i wanna contribute an effort post about Combustion Engines and Emissions. Been looking forward to this since Fishmech made their claim that a 1970s US manufactured automobile is cleaner than nowadays (cheatin') Diesels, but i wanted to honor such a claim with a worthy reply, so here it comes. First of all, we have to establish what are emissions, which i want to use this Image for from my Master Class at alternative Fuels and Powertrains  we feed an Engine Air (N2, O2) and Hydrocarbons (HC) these can include the extreme cases of pure Hydrogen and pure Carbon (coal) and we get natural (wanted) emissions like Water, N2, sometimes O2 and CO2 (CO2 being wanted, as it is the final product of Carbon oxidation) we also get unwanted emissions, these are the results of combustion imperfections and can occur in the form of Carbonmonoxide (CO) Nitrousoxides (NOx, but not N2O) Hydrocarbons and Sud (Particles - Ruß in german) Note that non desulphured Fuels can also result in Sulfuroxide emissions (SOx) but thats been an american problem outside of third world countries. we esentially have 3 groups of emissions here, Emissions that we dont care about (H20,O2,N2) Emissions that result in Global Warming (CO2 and HC) and emissions that are unhealthy (NOx, CO, HC and Particles) On the Terms of Carbon Dioxide. Carbon dioxide is the final product of a complete oxidation of the Carbon parts in our fuel. It is a wanted emission, although we want as little of it as possible. The amount of Carbon Dioxide emissions is influenced by 3 Factors: The Energy demand of our Vehicle, The efficiency of our Powertrain and the Type of fuel. Lets break down the 3 and look for ways to improve the situation. The first Option is to require less Energy to move our vehicle. Because Energy is Power multiplied by Time and Power is Force multiplied by velocity, we shall look at the Force consumption of a driving situation instead.  (sorry for the German) Our Vehicle has 4 types of Propulsion force drains, the sum of which we shall call drive resistance (Fw) from here on. The First type of resistance is Rolling resistance (Fr) The rolling resistance is depending on a tire parameter kr, the vehicle mass and gravity. Here are some typical numbers for the tire parameter kr  as we can see, vehicle weight is affecting our rolling resistance proportional. Second is Air resistance The Air resistance is affecting the vehicle according to its resistance coefficient, the Frontal surface area and the squared velocity of the vehicle. Funny enough, since the 90s the frontal surface area has increased about the same as the cw rating has decreased for most classes of vehicles, so our cars have actually not gotten more efficient with regards to air resistance Third is our Ramp resistance. Driving Uphill requires extra force. notice that this is also dependant on vehicle mass. Last is acceleration resistance. this looks very similar to Ramp resistance. The factor Lambda is just a representation of rotating masses on the vehicle and is close to 1 for personal vehicles. Notice how this is also proportionally influenced by vehicle mass. In conclusion, Drive resistance is very, very much dependant on vehicle mass. Any weight saving on a vehicle pretty much lineary reduces energy demand therefore. Back to CO2 saving. we talked about reducing the demand of mechanical energy that we need, now we shall talk about efficiency. The majority of Heat Energy produced by burning a Fuel is not transformed into mechanical energy but into waste heat. because our CO2 generation for a given Fuel is the direct inverse of the Fuel efficiency of the vehicle, Making a more efficient Powertrain means generating less CO2. This is a topic on its own but there are basically 3 main options for imrpoving efficiency. Reduction of scavenging and mechanical losses and increase in combustion Temperature. Scavenging losses occur if during your intake stroke, your piston has to operate against a (partial) vacuum and if your piston has to operate against backpressure during the exhausst stroke. Intake vacuum may occur as a result of throttle position in quantitiy controlled (Petrol) engines. You can reduce the intake vacuum by downsizing the engine, which results in a higher intake pressure to achive the same torque delivery at reduced displacement. You can also use variable valve lift to reduce the time the valves open, in order to change a throttle operation to an isentrope expansion, which is energy that you make back during the compression stroke. Valvetronic and VTEC are making use of this to different degrees. You can even reverse this effect by applying boost to your intake, which will push down the piston and create useable work during the intake stroke. Reducing Backpressuse in the exhaust system works the same way, just that you now look at reducing Pressure instead of rising it. The modern Turbo charged Petrol engine and the Turbo diesel are direct results of the downsizing attempt although they work to different degrees. There is a major problem with downsizing and turbo charging petrol engines which is internally known as Otto-Gate. Because of thermodynamic reasons and Knock constraints, a Petrol engine is less efficient than a diesel, which means the exhaust is hotter (more waste energy). A Turbo charger has a material dependent maximum temperature that you can never exceed or you literally melt the turbine. For this reason, we enrich the mixture under high loads much more than we would need for optimal power generation. The added fuel does nothing else than cooling the exhaust gas by providing evaporation cooling. It also does not participate in combustion and it has some very bad downsides when it comes to CO and HC emissions. This behavior is completely opposed to a Naturally Aspirated Petrol engine, which gets more and more efficent, the more load you ask from it, because your scavenging losses go down as you open the throttle and your mechanical losses become relatively smal compared to your overall power delivery. Raising Combustion Temperature means your thermal efficency rises. the higher the Temperature differential between your heat source and your heat sink, the higher the thermal efficiency of the engine. Thats why much compression = much efficiency The Last Influencer for CO2 is the fuel itself. Hydrocarbons come in different forms and they follow the Formula CxH2x+2. As the Hydrogen combusts into water, The shorter the HC chain, the lower are the relative Carbon emissions. Here is an illustration to show that, including the extreme cases of coal and H2.  the Energy value is Heat As you can see, by burning Methane instead of coal, we already save 50% CO2 without even considering the higher overall efficiency of combustion If we factor in the gains in efficiency for Power Plants for example, we can save up to 67% of raw CO2 emissions by switching from Lignite to Natural Gas  (first column is CO2 per Unit of Heat, Second is Overall efficiency, third is CO2 per Unit of Energy) Because of the higher Thermal efficiency, a modern diesel engine is pretty much the cleanest you can ask for when it comes to low CO2 vehicle emissions. When looking at the entire power generation chain it is even lower on CO2 than electric vehicles (depends on country) Aditionally, you can fuel any diesel Engine with up to 10% of regenerative Diesel, which directly removes 10 percent of the Carbon Footprint. With modifications to the Injection system, you can also burn 100% regenerative diesel in various forms like HVO, RME and of course synthetic diesel without modifications. Now its time to look at unwanted (Toxic) emissions. These Emissions have no impact on the Global Climate and are of concern only due to their concentration in Urban areas. In general, these emissions are less of a concern for highway use. This is not the case for Tetraethyllead and Sulphuroxides, which you do not want to emit under any circumstances. A sidenote, the 70/80s American Car will emit both TEL and SOx due to shoddy fuel quality and because of a dude named Thomas Midgley Jr. who was later known as the most toxic single organism in the history of earth, having not only invented TEL (and lobbied against its ban for several decades succesfully) but also Chlorofluorocarbon and lobbying against a ban of those long after we knew what they did to the ozone layer. first of all, we need to know how much actually comes out of our Engines which is, nowadays, quite frankly shockingly little  These are Raw Engine Emissions (before treatment) for a) modern MPI Petrol and b) Common-Rail Diesel. note how the overall unwanted emissions make up 1,1% of the Petrol Raw emissions and only 0,2% of the diesel emissions. The emissions of carbureted vehicles (1970 murica) are about 5x higher in untreated (raw) emissions. so for the grande comparison of the 1970 american petrol versus the cheater diesel, you look at about 5% Toxic emissions for the 1970s Petrol versus 0,2 Percent toxic emissions for the Commo Rail diesel engine. or said otherwise an increase in toxic emissions by 2400% if you switch from a completely untreated modern diesel to a 1970 murican petrol engine (this doesnt even factor in efficiency loss, TEL or SOx emissions). Cheers Fishmech. If we look at the contents of the toxic emissions, we see that the Petrol engine is emitting mainly CO and a bit of HC and NOx and basically no particles. Because all (good) Petrol engines run stochiometric, we should in theory have no toxic emissions past engine oil consumption, so very little. The toxic emissions are a result of 2 effects. Incomplete (or completely missing) oxidation and High Temperature Nitro-Oxide reactions that occur naturally when you combust in air instead of pure oxygen and do so at high temp (which we want for high efficiency) Because we in theory have all the ingredients for a proper balanced reaction in our MPI petrol engine, we use a 3 way catalyst to take the Oxygen from the NOx and oxidize the CO and HC Molecules to CO2 and water. this works pretty drat good and is the reason that the absolute (treated) emissions of an MPI petrol engine (not downsized Direct injection turbo thoug - lol) are better than for a diesel. Because a Diesel engine uses the mixture ratio itself to regulate engine load, it always operates lean. this means the cylinder charge is chemically unbalanced. We have more than enough oxygen to oxidize any forms of HC and CO residues, but we do not have enough HC and CO to reduce the NOx back to N2. It is also difficult to react Particles, because they are inert under normal exhaust conditions and require excessive temperature to be oxidized. Because of the ease of dealing with the (already low) HC and CO emissions, DI diesels were already early in the 2000s universally equipped with Oxy cats. these also reduce NOx emissions by up to 40% and some particles (especially the micro particles) but they are mainly there to completely get rid of CO and HC. Getting Rid of Particles and NOx always requires extra effort, because our Exhaust gas does not have what it takes to deal with those under optimal engine conditions. For NOx, we use EGR, exhaust gas recirculation, to reduce the amount of available oxygen in the cylinder and to reduce Combustion temperature by adding a cool inert gas. EGR is the first of the "problematic" technologies because it results in sudded intakes, sudded EGR valves, poor engine running and poor power delivery. One of VWs fixes to dieselgate was cranking up EGR rates. The second option are catalysts. The diesel exhaust normally doesnt have the quantity of oxidizable reserves to allow for full balanced NOx reduction so we do one of 2 things, SCR (selective catalytic reduction) which uses an additional fluid - AdBlue to give the NOx a reduction partner. The other Option is NOx accumulator converters. these accumulate a certain amount of NOx for about half a minute or so before they are full. they then require available HC molecules to react the accumulated NOx. This is done by enriching the exhaust. you waste precious fuel for this by the way. The first option costs you an additional fluid, the second costs you fuel. Either way you have to use something to get rid of NOx and both costs money (and has certain other downsides) Particles? think like NOx accumulator converters. There was a brief time of the "open" filter which used a catalytically active "swirl" way to catch and oxidize Particles. those catched a lot of micro particles, but not enough of the big ones to be effective for OEM use. What we use are "closed" membrane filters which fill up with Particles and need to be regenerated by heating up the exhaust (with fuel). By the way, if you are afraid of particles. Move out of the city and quit your office job. the exposure you get to them by traffic is gently caress all compared to spending a few minutes next to a running laser printer or in a Subway station. The vehicle particle emissions also have many non Engine sources like tires, Brake debris, Brushed DC motors and the like, so switching to EVs doesnt even help to close the particle chapter and theres almost no gains in toxic emissions by going from an MPI petrol to an EV. So thats it for this folks. Someone asked about Honda. I like their classic VTEC MPI engines, but i feel they lost it with the new Turbos. Now to end on a good quote "He, who is without oil, shall throw the first Rod" -Compressions 8,7:1 Combat Theory fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Apr 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
im the steinkohle
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
tfw u put pritt stick on ur chin and then roll in pops beard shavings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
imagine getting fishmeched that hard
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
Endless Mike posted:imagine getting fishmeched that hard that's probably more than you can learn from a single wikipedia article though
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
I’m not reading all of that but I will assume that the conclusion is that private car ownership should be banned
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 20:33
|
|
|
leftist heap posted:I’m not reading all of that but I will assume that the conclusion is that private car ownership should be banned cars are a crime against god and nature and everyone in the auto industry will be tried in the hague
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
Living anywhere near a busy freeway where it doesn't rain much will straight up cover your window sills with rubber/brake pad particulate. I'd rather suck a tailpipe all day than have that poo poo floating around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 21:14
|
|
|
muckswirler posted:Living anywhere near a busy freeway where it doesn't rain much will straight up cover your window sills with rubber/brake pad particulate. I'd rather suck a tailpipe all day than have that poo poo floating around. Could both be bad? I mean, just saying: Emissions regs are good. And did you specifically get the particulate tested? Because chances are also made up of vehicle exhaust particulate, not just brake pad dust...
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
combat theory what are your thoughts on banning private car ownership
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
Thank you very much, Combat Theory, that was a very informative post!
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 22:38
|
|
|
Both of my vehicles are pre-emissions. I can't imagine what life was like when all vehicles smelled like they do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
don't bring me down Ruß
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
leftist heap posted:combat theory what are your thoughts on banning private car ownership This is a tricky question. I collect and rebuild youngtimers and writeoffs as a hobby so i myself very much like owning cars and bikes and i think its not really feasible to ban ownership. I would suggest rather drastic measures about usage. Cars need to get out of the city regardless of their powertrain, they are very mass and space inefficient and the argument about individual mobility being a part of quality of life doesnt really bite when literally every other way of mobility is superior in cost and experience. I think heavily urbanized areas should have a car ban from 6AM to 8PM during which hours Public Transport should be the way to go and individual mobility happens on 2 Wheels. I also think it is way too cheap to own big vehicles. A fixed maximum weight for a practical safe car should be set, say 1250 kg and every kilogram extra adds a cost of 50$ to the purchase price. you buy a 2 ton SUV, you pay almost 40k $ on top. You can still buy an SUV if you really fancy it, but as a means of general automotive mobility they are heavily discouraged by price. I live far out on the countryside and i dont see public transport being a feasible alternative to individual mobility here. I also think that there will be no final answer to the Powertrain question. There are 3 major Streams Happening. Electric, Diesel ICE and Petrol Hybrid and all 3 have their own use cases. The Long range travel is simply diesel territory. Its the perfect engine for the Job. The Hybrid Petrol offers a good compromise and for short travel (for which we do sometimes need a car) the pure EV is the best option. This plays towards the strenghts of the individual Powertrains instead of trying to force one of them into a territory its just not really suited for. The Diesel is a horrible short range drive, its taking a long time to reach operating temperature and its emissions control systems only really work acceptable at medium and high load, where theres a lot of Energy in the Exhaust and your Combustion is close to the thermodynamic optimum. The EV is a horrible long range drive as you need to carry rediculous amounts of battery mass, Fast charging kills your already fragile cells and the Thermal management of the cabin requires the use of Propulsion energy. The Petrol Hybrid plays to the strenghts of both, but not to the extend that either solution does. it is the best compromise if you have to have only one vehicle. The private Diesel should be banned from the city in my opinion. The Hybrid Petrol should be allowed outside peak hours. For compensation, emissions regulations for diesels should be lessened in order to increase efficiency at highway speeds. All Cars must get lighter. not only for the sake of efficiency but also because we are very unlikely to ever see long lasting vehicles again and theres a serious problem about resource consumption during vehicle production. This has gotten a lot worse since we started to heavily utilize composite structural building because composites are almost impossible to recycle. Same with batteries. Combat Theory fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Apr 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 23:32
|
|
|
Combat Theory posted:The Diesel is a horrible short range drive, its taking a long time to reach operating temperature and its emissions control systems only really work acceptable at medium and high load, where theres a lot of Energy in the Exhaust and your Combustion is close to the thermodynamic optimum. While I would discourage short range driving in a diesel, they no longer take long to reach operating temps. That's been resolved with recent diesels, and generally once you reach the exit to your neighborhood from your driveway, the engine is at operating temperature. But yes, if you are not revving your diesel enough (i.e. highway and acceleration) your emissions system will get mad at you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:While I would discourage short range driving in a diesel, they no longer take long to reach operating temps. That's been resolved with recent diesels, and generally once you reach the exit to your neighborhood from your driveway, the engine is at operating temperature. the way this is resolved is by burning extra fuel in a seperate heater and the emissions from that box are poo poo scary (not that we count them under Euro 6 lmao , 20°C Lab conditions, baby). Or if you wanna go cheap you inject extra fuel during the exhaust stroke but thats also...urgh... inefficient as hell. Thats also done to heat up the exhaust cleaning systems. All in all short range diesel works somewhat, but its because we force it to work, not because its in any way suited or a good choice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 00:14
|
|
|
Combat Theory posted:the way this is resolved is by burning extra fuel in a seperate heater and the emissions from that box are poo poo scary (not that we count them under Euro 6 lmao). Or if you wanna go cheap you inject extra fuel during the exhaust stroke but thats also...urgh... inefficient as hell. Thats also done to heat up the exhaust cleaning systems. I think the TDIs are just doing the delayed injection method, there's no secondary heater. Its worth noting my one way commute is about 38 miles, but I've pissed off the DPF by doing short runs before and had to switch to sport mode to keep the revs high so it could do a regen. I'm a huge Diesel and EV fan, but I primarily build and modify Diesels.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I think the TDIs are just doing the delayed injection method, there's no secondary heater. Depends on the model and year. All Pumpe-Düse Engines had the "Zuheizer" since the PD-System lacks the option of a Post-Injection. They can produce quite some spectacular Emissions when they get old. Notice the tick-tick noise of the dosage pump for the heater. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wsvsvXMtZ4 VW also uses 500W PTC heaters for the Cabin on some models but this leaves the engine cold. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBx7wuCavJs My brand knowledge is too limited though to tell what car and year has which heating equipment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 00:37
|
|
|
Combat Theory posted:Depends on the model and year. All Pumpe-Düse Engines had the "Zuheizer" since the PD-System lacks the option of a Post-Injection. PD hasn't been used for a while on US bound TDIs, the last PDs I've worked on were Passat or Jettas 2006-2009, the Q7 TDI I have is Common Rail.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 00:53
|
|
|
that was a heck of a post but I didn't see the part where Tesla went bankrupt
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
Lol I interviewed at this place https://www.clevescene.com/scene-an...?media=AMP+HTML
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 04:02
|
|
|
Good Combat Theory posts. I think I finally get what EGR does, especially in the context of the circuit you were trying to design done months ago to manage an EGR valve on one of your cars. If I recall correctly, you wanted to increase EGR as exhaust temperature increased, thus depriving the engine of some oxygen? Can't recall that detail. One oyher question, what does any of this have to do with Star Citizen? Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Apr 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 04:33
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Good Combat Theory posts. I think I finally get what EGR does, especially in the context of the circuit you were trying to design done months ago to manage an EGR valve on one of your cars. If I recall correctly, you wanted to increase EGR as exhaust temperature increased, thus depriving the engine of some oxygen? Can't recall that detail. If you want a jpg of an engine, give star citizen money If you want an engine, give Honda money the jpg is more expensive
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 06:34
|
|
|
Combat Theory posted:...Fishmech made their claim ... wanted to honor such a claim with a worthy reply... I, uh, yeah OK if you want to I guess? just beware of flying goalposts
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 09:01
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Could both be bad? I mean, just saying: Lol what point did you think I was trying to make? But anyway go drive your car in the desert. Look at the wheels. Notice how they turn black from pad dust in like two days? Now let your car idle in the driveway for a month. Notice how your bumper/rear fascia isn't covered with groß black slime? Also I don't think you get enough gritty pulverized rubber particles out the tailpipe of the vast majority of functional engines to coat a 4 mile radius in them in a few weeks. No testing required.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 09:09
|
|
|
back in my day they used asbestos in brake linings, and we liked it! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 11:29
|
|
|
AsbestosPos. Confirming the proper pronunciation is YussPuss.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Good Combat Theory posts. I think I finally get what EGR does, especially in the context of the circuit you were trying to design done months ago to manage an EGR valve on one of your cars. If I recall correctly, you wanted to increase EGR as exhaust temperature increased, thus depriving the engine of some oxygen? Can't recall that detail. Almost, the car in question has a Petrol Engine with EGR. We use EGR on those to reduce Scavenging losses by increasing intake pressure without increasing engine load (as the recirculated gas is inert). As it is a stochiometric Petrol Engine, the raw NOx emissions are pretty unimportant and can always be catalysed to N2. The Problem that i had to circumvent with the EGR was that the implementation in the intake system was bad and resulted in a sudded Throttle control valve which left the Gas Pedal really really crusty after one or 2 tanks of Gas and it also sudded the Upstream Parts of the intake manifold that wasnt flushed by the injector stream so i deactivated the system. In reality the reduction of scavenging losses isnt making up for the added losses of sudded intakes and degraded engine behavior if you run EGR on a Petrol engine, so its pretty common to deactivate the systems. It is also not harmful for the motor (quite the opposite) since the systems are turned off under high load by default (as you otherwise could not achieve maximum torque) which is exactly when you expect your high Temps. All Engines are designed to perform without EGR, it is mostly a matter to sweeten our emissions tests and Economy ratings, without many real world gains, but with some steep real world downsides especially for direct injection engines. Combat Theory fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Apr 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
muckswirler posted:Lol what point did you think I was trying to make? But anyway go drive your car in the desert. Look at the wheels. Notice how they turn black from pad dust in like two days? Now let your car idle in the driveway for a month. Notice how your bumper/rear fascia isn't covered with groß black slime? Also I don't think you get enough gritty pulverized rubber particles out the tailpipe of the vast majority of functional engines to coat a 4 mile radius in them in a few weeks. No testing required.  I build cars, trust me, I know. Also: LMAO if your bumper isn't covered in exhaust grime, because it DOES happen. And after idling your car for a month, you won't have cam left, because it'll be burned.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:01
|
|
|
my bumper isn’t because i inhale my car exhaust. i call it “posting fuel”.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:26
|
|
|
i sure find youre posts exhausting too!!@
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
ol qwerty bastard posted:i sure find youre posts exhausting too!!@ lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:14
|
|
|
President Beep posted:my bumper isn’t because i inhale my car exhaust. i call it “posting fuel”. is that why they put everyone to sleep??
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:39
|
|
|
drat. drat.......
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:45 |
|
|
rip
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:41
|
|
