Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated.

Go Back   Australian Ford Forums > General Topics > Non Ford Related Community Forums > The Bar

The Bar For non Automotive Related Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 16-01-2006, 10:22 AM   #151
BAUTE
formerly known as AUUTE
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: canberra
Posts: 120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sourbastard
If cyclists are on the road and to be treated like any other vehicle I believe they should pay Registration.

My reasoning is very simple.

The infrastructure for bike paths & lanes are not free, the concrete doesnt lay itself down, and the people who plan traffic management for bicycles also do not work for free. There is an inherant cost there, and it should not be born by those who do not use it.
This is the same trap John fell in to, there is no link between rego and road funding, I ride my bike to work, I pay tax, hence are paying for both the roads I drive on and the bikepaths I use where they are appropriate.

I don't have children I don't want to subsidise childcare or schools for people that choose to have kids but I don't have a choice either.

I won't argue on insurance its not a bad idea, I am covered under the public liability component of my contents insurance however
BAUTE is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 16-01-2006, 11:19 AM   #152
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parawolf
Now this is the first time in this thread that the reasoning behind rego for cyclists has been properly justified. However I'm already covered? How I pay $85 a year to be a Bicycle Victoria Member Now as this is not a government backed compulsory registration, $85 is excessively more than what it would be if every victorian cyclist would have to pay.

Now, any cyclist is automatically covered by TAC, and this 'membership' provides additional amounts above the upper limits provided by the TAC.

I figure if it was similarly configured 'insurance/registration' as part of a complusary payment to the state government - it would probably be less than $10 per year. Even it could be built into a one-off registration charge when you buy a new bike from a bike store of say $25 (I believe this because most of the people at my work BUG - Bicycle User Group - change their bike every 3 - 4 years).

I'd be happy with a registration, as long as it provided me with coverage at least equal to my Bicycle Victoria membership.
My understanding is that TAC only covers a cyclist if they hit a car that is being driven. If a cyclist swerves to miss a an erratic driver and rides into the back of a parked car, TAC will not cover the cyclist medical costs.
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 16-01-2006, 11:41 AM   #153
Sourbastard
Moderator
Contributing Member
 
Sourbastard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Adelaide SA
Posts: 5,584
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAUTE
This is the same trap John fell in to, there is no link between rego and road funding
OK, not sure where this has come from, but I used to work for Transport SA in 2000/2001, and Registration and Licensing fees valued at $205,352,000 went straight into the revenue and budget for the department to operate. Total revenue including other fees and services(Inspections, custom license plates etc etc etc) came to $497,663,000 for the 2001 year. Now I dont know how things are done in Vic, but over here, the money you pay for registration services goes straight into the department and gets spent on roads and services, it doesnt get sent back to the government. Ever. If you do, they cut your budget for the next year.

Now the revenue from the government appropriation that year was only $16,155,000, which is chicken feed compared to that taken in registration fees.
__________________

1965 XP Falcon Deluxe Sedan
1978 XC Falcon Wagon Rallypack
2003 BA Fairlane G220

Windsor Powah!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7hT9dxD2hM

Sourbastard is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 16-01-2006, 12:13 PM   #154
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parawolf
Apart from that they shouldn't be riding 3 abreast, except if 1 rider is overtaking 2, but nothing what you have said is illegal. So why are you tapping your horn? There is nothing illegal about what they are doing (again apart from riding permanently 3 abreast). So if you a tapping your horn because you are being held up, deal with it. If you want do something, ring the police and get them to fine those that are riding 3 abreast.
According to VicRoads cyclist can ride up to four abreast.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VicRoads
A cyclist must not ride alongside more than one other rider unless:

the rider is overtaking other cyclists who may be cycling beside each other; or
the rider is taking part in an on-road cycling event that has been approved by the Chief Commissioner of Police.

If a cyclist is riding alongside another cyclist, the cyclist must not ride more than 1.5 m from the other cyclist.
If anybody beeps there horn at me I usually give a sarcastic wave. Cars don't beep at slow moving tractors/trucks/cranes/etc to get out of the way, so why should they beep at cyclist.

Last edited by xbgs351; 16-01-2006 at 12:20 PM.
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 16-01-2006, 04:06 PM   #155
XR8 Phantom
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Well at the risk of being far too agreeable..........

I think sourbastard has raised the first legitimate point with regard to a user pays system of any kind for cyclists. In the climate we live in proper coverage over both your and others assets is crucial, as well as with respect to injury claims and costs. Putting my bike away for a moment and imagining my XR8 being clouted by a cyclist because he didn't like my driving (or parking), it's definately an fair point.

xbgs351 is right, I've been held up on country roads far more often by slow moving vehicles than bikes over the years and have no ill will towards their actions. Unfortunately there are certain areas that attract lots of cyclists who do have the potential to affect the flow of traffic (ie Beach Rd on a Sunday morning) but as I have mentioned previously most cyclists (particularly when in groups) on weekend mornings. Easier said than done I know but if they annoy you so much avoid the areas. If not, accept they are going to be there and deal with it.
  Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 16-01-2006, 09:24 PM   #156
MO
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
MO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: QLD
Posts: 4,446
Default

I was thinking of the rego thing being a local council routine...who's worse than a council inspector when it comes to issuing fines.

Not to mention the bike paths etc are the local councils responsibility.

As for the insurance I would've thought everyone covered their backside by having lots of insurance in this litigous society we have.

Ooohh just had a thought as to what else should be registered with councils...but thats another thread..maybe.
__________________
FORD RULES OK

The more I know ppl the more I love my DOGS.
2011 SY Territory Limited Edition TS
2000 AUII SE ute IL6
MO is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-01-2006, 05:33 PM   #157
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

http://www.bv.com.au/inform.php?a=7&b=176&c=549

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicyle Victoria
Bike paths and lanes cost a fraction of other infrastructure
Average cost for one kilometre of:

Freeway
$13 million

Tram track
$8 million

Off-road bike path
$150,000

On-road bike lane
$20,000 (to mark bike lanes on an existing road)
http://stcwa.org.au/journal/18Sept20...339_19533.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sustainable Transport Solutions
Integrated planning is vital to achieve a safe, bicycle friendly environment in urban areas that will entice would-be cyclists onto bicycles for local and commuter trips. Good planning features include separated, car-free, on- and off-road provision for bicycles.

The costs for cyclist hospitalisations show that serious consideration in planning is imperative: the five-year average of cyclist hospitalisations in WA is 3,200 per annum (26 per cent of all road crash hospitalisations). With an estimated cost per hospitalisation of $360,000, cyclist crashes cost the State more than $1 billion per year, and this ignores fatalities ($1.8 million each) and accidents requiring out-of-hospital treatment.

Low cycling activity is often correlated with transport policies that pay little attention to the safety of cyclists. York City Council (UK) developed a transport strategy that placed 'vulnerable' road users at the top of the road user hierarchy and implemented appropriate traffic restraint measures. As a result, bicycle trips rose from 16 to 19 per cent between 1991 and 2000, car use declined from 55 to 53 per cent and there were 30 per cent fewer bicycle casualties.

Most roads in Perth do not comply with the principles of spatial requirements for bicycles as developed in the Austroads Guide to Engineering Practice Part 14 for Bicycles, yet there is excessive provision for motor traffic. The principle that "every street is a bicycle street", espoused in the Bicycle Strategy for the 21st Century (Government of WA, 1996), needs to be imbedded in operational road planning and design. Appropriate road design minimum standards must be applied to the construction and maintenance of road works undertaken by State and Local Governments.
http://www.pedalpower.org.au/oldsite/about/benefits.htm
Benefits of the Bicycle
Written by: MATTHEW J. ZOLL, Arizona

Quote:
Recently there have been several letters to the editor recommending that bicycles "pay their way." I'd like to discuss a few of the facts related to this. Federal Highway Administration data indicate that 93% of the cyclists are also drivers who pay motor vehicle taxes. Regional transportation costs show that bicycle lanes add approximately 2% to the cost of building roads. Sidewalks add another 2 percent. Not many people demand that pedestrians pay the full costs of sidewalks.

Bicycle lanes benefit all users. A 1989 Texas Transportation Institute study found that bicycle lanes provide nearly $5 in safety benefits for drivers alone for every $1 in costs. A 1995 FHWA study found that bicycle lanes reduce motor vehicle crashes by 49 percent. Who pays for transportation costs, and how? Should all costs be paid for directly by users, and therefore only those payers can legally use the facility? When was the last time we paid a fee at the door to visit a library, park, or to send our kids to public school? Another 1995 FHWA study determined drivers pay less than 20 percent of the total costs of driving, including costs for building and maintaining roads, costs for air pollution, congestion, accidents, loss of open space and other factors.

We pay for some of the road costs through other means, including housing costs for roadways built as part of developments, property taxes, sales taxes, such as those used in Phoenix freeway system, and development impact fees. The indirect costs are paid through higher insurance premiums and hospitalization bills. According to a 1997 FHWA report, the total social costs of air pollution are $40 billion per year, with over 60 percent of Americans living in areas that fail to meet national air quality standards.

Even more significant, the U.S. now has the highest obesity rates in the world and heart disease is the number one killer of Americans. Meanwhile, we spend less than $500 million annually on programs that benefit healthful walking and bicycling.

The U.S. Department of Transportation estimates we spend less than $1 per child per year on bicycle and pedestrian safety education in our schools. The number one goal of thousands of Tucson respondents to the Tucson Livable Communities Initiative last year was to have "Viable and Accessible Alternatives to Automobile Transportation." Let's continue to help people get back on their feet and rediscover the joys of walking and cycling for the true personal mobility and improved health.
http://www.transport.qld.gov.au/qt/L...nsportbenefits
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUEENSLAND TRANSPORT
Transport benefits

Maintaining and improving the transport network costs the Australian government an average of $A27 million every working day.

Bikes do less damage to road surfaces than cars. Bike paths give people "freeways" for the price of footpaths.

The estimated costs of congestion are $A5 billion per year. More bikes and less cars on the road can reduce this congestion and its associated costs.

Bikes and cycling facilities can extend the catchments of existing public transport services. On average, 10 times more households are within cycling distance of public transport than are within walking distance.

The majority of car trips to school are within walking distance. Cycling or walking these trips significantly reduces congestion around schools and improves safety for children.

To achieve a 75 per cent increase in cycling trips would require each person in Australia to substitute two car trips per month with cycling.

Bicycles offer door to door service because they can be parked closer to destinations than cars. They are often quicker than cars over short distances of up to five km.

Bicycle lanes and paved shoulders on roads create a number of benefits for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. These include:
Improved safety for cyclists and motorists - due to reduced need to travel out of the lane to pass cyclists.
Additional space for motorists to stop in the event of a mechanical difficulty, emergency, or to escape potential crashes or reduce their severity.
Access for emergency vehicles as motorists have more space to move out of their path.
Extra sight distance and turning space.
Cycling conserves roadway and residential space thereby providing opportunities for less cement and more plant life in urban areas. Up to 40 per cent of urban areas in Australia are taken up by providing infrastructure for motor vehicles including roads, car parking, service stations and auto manufacture
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-01-2006, 07:00 PM   #158
Hunter
Ex EL Falcon
 
Hunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bris-bane
Posts: 683
Default

$13m per km... that seems a little excessive.
Hunter is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-01-2006, 09:30 PM   #159
parawolf
beep beep
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter
$13m per km... that seems a little excessive.
$13m does sound high, but the amount of engineering effort that goes into building a road from scratch is massive. I see first hand from friends that are in engineering working on the eastlink project. Then there is problem things like land aquistion costs to factor in, water run off, environmental repair, electrical supply, and then the amount of raw materials and the time taken.

But this discussion diverts from the thread topic.
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along, move along...
parawolf is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-01-2006, 09:41 PM   #160
max^power
Formerly au^ute
 
max^power's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: VIC
Posts: 1,032
Default

OMG what a can of worms...sorry for posting it.
max^power is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-01-2006, 09:56 PM   #161
b0son
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xbgs351
http://www.bv.com.au/inform.php?a=7&b=176&c=549

On-road bike lane
$20,000 (to mark bike lanes on an existing road)
Bah! $20k per km??? Hardly a valid comparison, they're using existing infrastructure. It's about as relevent as saying roads for cars are only $20k/km, by marking out lines on existing $13mil/km bike paths.

It would cost a damn sight more to create a bike path of road quality from scratch.
b0son is online now   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-01-2006, 10:02 PM   #162
HOON69
Banned
 
HOON69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In A House
Posts: 2,467
Default

if the bike is entitled to be riden on the road then drivers should abide by the road rules etc

bike riders need to remember they are small and should stay left and not hog 75% of a lane they shouldnt be allowed to spread out should be nose to tail etc

bikes paying rego : yeah right next it'll be rollerblades skates and kites need to apply to fly their kites in air space etc

common courtesy goes along way..
HOON69 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-01-2006, 10:11 PM   #163
MO
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
MO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: QLD
Posts: 4,446
Default

Its coming sooner than you think....dogs have to be registered why not cats and the rest.
__________________
FORD RULES OK

The more I know ppl the more I love my DOGS.
2011 SY Territory Limited Edition TS
2000 AUII SE ute IL6
MO is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-01-2006, 10:17 PM   #164
LUXO_8
windsor user
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Geelong
Posts: 13,123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John McMaster
Its coming sooner than you think....dogs have to be registered why not cats and the rest.
dogs and cats have to be registered, also, i believe they have to be desexed unless you have a permit to be a breeder......

but thread has taken itself off on a tangent, lets get back to Cycling and cyclists shall we
LUXO_8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-01-2006, 10:26 PM   #165
MO
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
MO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: QLD
Posts: 4,446
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MADNC_8
dogs and cats have to be registered, also, i believe they have to be desexed unless you have a permit to be a breeder......

but thread has taken itself off on a tangent, lets get back to Cycling and cyclists shall we
Dogs have to be rego'd in any council not so cats some may require it but not all.

As for the blades and boards the councils in most cases provide them a venue this comes out of ratepayers money...so why should'nt others contribute to the system...this is not off track...it is about user pays!!!!!!!!
__________________
FORD RULES OK

The more I know ppl the more I love my DOGS.
2011 SY Territory Limited Edition TS
2000 AUII SE ute IL6
MO is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-01-2006, 11:32 AM   #166
parawolf
beep beep
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John McMaster
Dogs have to be rego'd in any council not so cats some may require it but not all.

As for the blades and boards the councils in most cases provide them a venue this comes out of ratepayers money...so why should'nt others contribute to the system...this is not off track...it is about user pays!!!!!!!!

You don't need rego your kids (if you have any) though.... So what is your point about user pays again? only people with kids use the kiddy play ground at the local park - why should my council fees go to this?

Why do they? because it is classified as basic infrastructure. It makes on suburb/council district more attractive than another, it attracts a different kind of person, and increases land and home values, which in turn the council charges more for their yearly rates.

Again i'd be happy to pay rego to the state government, however at a pro-rata rate weight for weight of a car, it would be about $4 per bike. The administration fees would make this $4 not work collecting, and establishing who has a bike and who doesn't have a bike.
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along, move along...
parawolf is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-01-2006, 02:42 PM   #167
b0son
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parawolf
Again i'd be happy to pay rego to the state government, however at a pro-rata rate weight for weight of a car, it would be about $4 per bike. The administration fees would make this $4 not work collecting, and establishing who has a bike and who doesn't have a bike.
On weight alone. What if it had some sort of insurance component (ie. CTP) to cover injuries to pedestrians etc? I doubt many such injuries happen, but when they do, there is little recourse for the victim under the current system.
b0son is online now   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-01-2006, 03:39 PM   #168
parawolf
beep beep
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by b0son
On weight alone. What if it had some sort of insurance component (ie. CTP) to cover injuries to pedestrians etc? I doubt many such injuries happen, but when they do, there is little recourse for the victim under the current system.
Well how does it happen now with TAC and a motor vehicle? There is little recourse for a pedestrian if the person is unregistered, or has false registration details. However TAC (in vic) is a no fault coverage policy. The pedestrian being covered by TAC in case of an accident with a motor vehicle by the assumed motor vehicle registration. If the vehicle is a hit and run, the person is still covered.

I still maintain that weight is a far call because that is the way that cars are covered (in victoria) I believe.

Assume a 80kg is hit by a 1800kg falcon.

Compare that again to a 80kg person being hit by a 80kg person on a 12kg bike.

The force of the impact would be far less as the cyclist has a lower Vmax than a car, is more manuverable than a car, and lower mass. It is very unlikely that a front on impact from a cyclist would occur, much more likely is to be clipped or winged by the cyclist. Assume a scaled up version of the same hit, a pedestrian that is likely to get away with bruising from a cyclist, could end up with a broken bone, or head injuries from a car.

Anyway, look at www.tacsafety.com.au and track some of stats in regards to pedestrian safety.

Between 1/Oct/2004 and 1/Oct/2005:
Fatalities: 30
Males: 18
Females: 12
12 out of those 30 were in the 70+ age group
And the most common day was Friday or Saturday to get killed.

Serious Injuries: 488
Males: 272
Females: 214
Unrecorded: 2
72 out of 488(the largest group) was again the over 70 age group.
And the most common day was Friday for an injury.

So by the reasoning shown by some people in this thread, the over 70's should be registered to be a pedestrian to improve safety for them.
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along, move along...
parawolf is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 08-07-2006, 07:46 PM   #169
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

bump

.
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 08-07-2006, 08:04 PM   #170
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malakai
Oh no, why did you do that?

Thread mining is punishable by public execution. Everyone to the town square!
Nothing in the rules about thread mining, but I did find this one (in bold):
Quote:
Site Terms & Conditions

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a moderated site, which means that there are a few simple rules in place to ensure that everyone is free to enjoy the community here without fear.

In short, the following things are not permitted:


1. Posts about or containing references to: religion, race, sensitive or controversial subjects.


2. Posts that are (or could reasonably be considered to be): defamatory, threatening, invasive of privacy, or which otherwise violate any law applicable within Australia.


3. Posts containing advertising material in any form except those posted on or on behalf of supporting site sponsors.


Posts which breach any of the points above will be removed at the absolute discretion of the administration team. If you feel that a post has been removed incorrectly then please use the Private Messaging system provided to discuss the issue with a member of the admin team rather than discuss the issue publicly.
_2:
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 08-07-2006, 08:51 PM   #171
MO
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
MO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: QLD
Posts: 4,446
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xbgs351
Nothing in the rules about thread mining, but I did find this one (in bold):

_2:
And your point is?
__________________
FORD RULES OK

The more I know ppl the more I love my DOGS.
2011 SY Territory Limited Edition TS
2000 AUII SE ute IL6
MO is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 09-07-2006, 09:52 AM   #172
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MO
And your point is?
No point, it was a joke :
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 09-07-2006, 09:12 PM   #173
MO
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
MO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: QLD
Posts: 4,446
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xbgs351
No point, it was a joke :

Don't give up your day job....a comediene your not!!!!!!
__________________
FORD RULES OK

The more I know ppl the more I love my DOGS.
2011 SY Territory Limited Edition TS
2000 AUII SE ute IL6
MO is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 10-07-2006, 12:29 PM   #174
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MO
Don't give up your day job....a comediene your not!!!!!!
How about a comedian? :
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 10-07-2006, 08:01 PM   #175
MO
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
MO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: QLD
Posts: 4,446
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xbgs351
How about a comedian? :

Well I went for the feminine because I thought your a bit of a big girls blouse(tic)
__________________
FORD RULES OK

The more I know ppl the more I love my DOGS.
2011 SY Territory Limited Edition TS
2000 AUII SE ute IL6
MO is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-07-2006, 09:19 AM   #176
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MO
Well I went for the feminine because I thought your a bit of a big girls blouse(tic)
Whatever floats your boat.
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-07-2006, 09:34 PM   #177
MO
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
MO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: QLD
Posts: 4,446
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xbgs351
Whatever floats your boat.

Just having fun no harm intended....hehehe
__________________
FORD RULES OK

The more I know ppl the more I love my DOGS.
2011 SY Territory Limited Edition TS
2000 AUII SE ute IL6
MO is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-07-2006, 08:14 AM   #178
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MO
Just having fun no harm intended....hehehe
I know :
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Reply


Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 02:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Other than what is legally copyrighted by the respective owners, this site is copyright www.fordforums.com.au
Positive SSL