1. #1
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 1999
    Posts
    396

    Default What's really wrong with apparatus manufacturers today?

    Seagrave is outsourcing to save money, ALF is cutting commissions, E-One is losing money and a Rosenbauer dealer laid off staff due to slow sales. No doubt the 2007 EPA engines kept some people from buying this year, but I see a bigger problem.

    How many big name manufacturers have people with long term fire service experience in key management and sales positions that know what firefighters really want or need? Most are run by LLC's, investment groups or people with commercial truck sales backgrounds. Their managers have spent 4 years in college but have never spent more than 4 hours in a firehouse.

    Fire chiefs and truck committees dont want to hear apparatus manufacturers say "we cant (or wont) add that" or "we dont deal with that equipment vendor." They want to hear "sure chief, we will look at it, but it will probably cost you an extra X dollars if we can do it." I sat in on a prebuild conference where every request had to be reviewed by a committee. These same small dollar requests used to be approved or denied before everyone went home. Frustrating.

    One prime example, a fire dept had been purchasing vehicles with red painted front bumpers for years. The chief decided that he liked the look of black bumpers with yellow chevrons and asked for the change on a new order. He was told no. Why? Because a middle manager said "we dont paint bumpers black." DUH! Wonder why you are losing orders?

    I am sure that Frederic Seagrave, Truckson LaFrance, Peter Pirsch and a few others are shaking their heads over what happened to the apparatus that have (or had) their names on the grill.
    Last edited by firepiper1; 10-26-2007 at 10:43 PM.
    I have only 2 allegiances, to my country and to my God. The rest of you are fair game.

  2. #2
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,684

    Default

    National Standards.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2

    Default Its really very simple.

    None of the manufacturers you mentioned have professional fire apparatus builders who understand the industry. You can't put "corporate" guys or "bean counters" in those positions.

    People who understand what firefighters do for a living, how they think, and how they buy will always come out on top.

    Read your fire apparatus history.

    What they are attempting has been tried time and again. It has and always failed.

    This industry is unique in that it cannot be relegated to a Harvard Business degree formula or Wharton business game plan that works in other industries.

  4. #4
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    37

    Exclamation Exactly

    Quote Originally Posted by firepiper1 View Post
    How many big name manufacturers have people with long term fire service experience in key management and sales positions that know what firefighters really want or need? Most are run by LLC's, investment groups or people with commercial truck sales backgrounds. Their managers have spent 4 years in college but have never spent more than 4 hours in a firehouse.
    Most of the dealerships are going that way too!

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,588

    Talking

    We had our last engine and heavy rescue trucks built by a small regional builder because the big boys didn't want to do things our way or if they did it was a huge price increase. The big boys want to mass produce cookie cutter pre-engineered trucks with little or no changes made to meet the customers needs. They seem to forget that WE are the customer. I understand that assembly line trucks that are all the same are easier to build , but one size fits all is not what works in this business. what works fine in the big city isn't worth a hill of beans out here in rural America and vice versa.

    We are currently out to bid on a brush truck and several of the salesmen from the big builders didn't even want to listen to us as far as our specs. They showed up with their specs for a brush truck and wanted us to change to their ideas of what we needed/wanted. Needless to say they were not invited to bid.If your too busy to listen to what we want , don't bother to waste our time.

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    710

    Default Business shift

    I have a theory that this s sort of an evolution in the apparatus business.

    Early on, individual people began businesses and grew their business. Customer service was a priority because the owners wanted to keep feeding their families.

    As the founders grew older, the torch was either passed to the children or sold outside the family. The children went one of two directions: Kept the business going in the same direction with am emphasis on customer service and product quality, or, the kids were more interested in spending the profits than maintaining the business.

    Many apparatus names disappeared in the late 1980's and early 1990's due to mergers an buyouts. I heard on dealer say at that time when the smoke cleared there would only be three to five major players in the apparatus market. I don't know if the some has cleared yet?

    As I see it there are both pros and cons when comparing publicly held vs. privately owned apparatus manufacturers.

    Privately (Family) owned

    Pros
    Commitment to quality products- The owners depend on the business for income.
    Customer service- A company cannot exist forever without repeat business. Not merely good, but excellent, customer service is vital to repeat business.
    Less red tape- As Piper mentioned, business decisions can be quicker because of fewer layers of bureaucracy.
    Cons
    Longevity - Many privately owned businesses drastically change with deaths and retirements.
    In-fighting- Siblings and in-laws can cause tension in the business that is felt by the customers
    Competence- Just be cause junior is a chip off the old block doesn't always mean he has the commitment and focus and business sense that Dad had.

    Publicly traded company
    Pros
    Deep pockets - These companies are usually more willing to invest more financial resources into R&D and advertising.
    Financial stability- Usually run by a board of directors with vast business experience
    Longevity- Publicly held companies generally weather economic storms better than private ones
    Cons
    Profit-driven: Profit and quality are in competition with one another. The goal of investor-owned entities is to generate profits for the stockholders.
    Technical expertise- The owners of some companies would know a discharge from and suction.

    NOTE: Notice I used the word generally and usually a lot. There are exception s to everything.

    For example: ALF is now-owned by a group that I am guessing knows little about the fire service. Sutphen is family-owned and has been in business since forever. Crimson is publicly-traded, but the president is an apparatus engineer. The big P is owned by a big brother, Oshkosh. And the list goes on.

    I really don't know which is better. I do know this. It seems that we have a stable full of out of business manufacturers who cause me ulcers trying to get parts for. I wish replacing them with newer rigs was an option, but it's not.

    The cause of my maintenance headaches are: Duplex/Grumman/Snorkel (none of which are in business anymore), EEI/ Hendrickson, Mack, Ward LaFrance.

  7. #7
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Woodbridge Twp, New Jersey
    Posts
    863

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Command6 View Post
    I have a theory that this s sort of an evolution in the apparatus business.

    Early on, individual people began businesses and grew their business. Customer service was a priority because the owners wanted to keep feeding their families.

    As the founders grew older, the torch was either passed to the children or sold outside the family. The children went one of two directions: Kept the business going in the same direction with am emphasis on customer service and product quality, or, the kids were more interested in spending the profits than maintaining the business.

    Many apparatus names disappeared in the late 1980's and early 1990's due to mergers an buyouts. I heard on dealer say at that time when the smoke cleared there would only be three to five major players in the apparatus market. I don't know if the some has cleared yet?

    As I see it there are both pros and cons when comparing publicly held vs. privately owned apparatus manufacturers.

    Privately (Family) owned

    Pros
    Commitment to quality products- The owners depend on the business for income.
    Customer service- A company cannot exist forever without repeat business. Not merely good, but excellent, customer service is vital to repeat business.
    Less red tape- As Piper mentioned, business decisions can be quicker because of fewer layers of bureaucracy.
    Cons
    Longevity - Many privately owned businesses drastically change with deaths and retirements.
    In-fighting- Siblings and in-laws can cause tension in the business that is felt by the customers
    Competence- Just be cause junior is a chip off the old block doesn't always mean he has the commitment and focus and business sense that Dad had.

    Publicly traded company
    Pros
    Deep pockets - These companies are usually more willing to invest more financial resources into R&D and advertising.
    Financial stability- Usually run by a board of directors with vast business experience
    Longevity- Publicly held companies generally weather economic storms better than private ones
    Cons
    Profit-driven: Profit and quality are in competition with one another. The goal of investor-owned entities is to generate profits for the stockholders.
    Technical expertise- The owners of some companies would know a discharge from and suction.

    NOTE: Notice I used the word generally and usually a lot. There are exception s to everything.

    For example: ALF is now-owned by a group that I am guessing knows little about the fire service. Sutphen is family-owned and has been in business since forever. Crimson is publicly-traded, but the president is an apparatus engineer. The big P is owned by a big brother, Oshkosh. And the list goes on.

    I really don't know which is better. I do know this. It seems that we have a stable full of out of business manufacturers who cause me ulcers trying to get parts for. I wish replacing them with newer rigs was an option, but it's not.

    The cause of my maintenance headaches are: Duplex/Grumman/Snorkel (none of which are in business anymore), EEI/ Hendrickson, Mack, Ward LaFrance.
    Kme is also a family owned business that is doing very well with there fire apparatus sales. PL Custom/Rescue1 is a family owned business here in New Jersey that has now signed a contract with ( Crimson ) to sell fire apparatus for the state of New Jersey !....
    Last edited by NewJerseyFFII; 10-28-2007 at 03:09 PM.

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    Firefighter807's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    East (Right) Coast
    Posts
    253

    Default

    Content deleted by author.
    Last edited by Firefighter807; 07-08-2009 at 07:32 PM.

  9. #9
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NewJerseyFFII View Post
    Kme is also a family owned business that is doing very well with there fire apparatus sales. PL Custom/Rescue1 is a family owned business here in New Jersey that has now signed a contract with ( Crimson ) to sell fire apparatus for the state of New Jersey !....
    What happened to PL and Seagrave?

  10. #10
    Let's talk fire trucks!
    BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,314

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firefighter807 View Post
    Oh yeah... almost forgot - hey - you should have bought a Pierce!
    Do you come to contribute anything, or just stir the pot with your Pierce-isms?

  11. #11
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firefighter807 View Post

    Oh yeah... almost forgot - hey - you should have bought a Pierce!
    You must have me mistaken with someone else: Career dept. has 3 Pierce pumpers, and VFD has two.

    Next apparatus won't be a Pierce though. They were no-shows at the bidding table. Business must be really good for them?? Reckon they don't need our $,$$$,$$$.$$

    I am not calling you out, but I do wonder about your propensity to promote Pierce so confidently. Are you a user or an employee?

    C6

  12. #12
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NewJerseyFFII View Post
    PL Custom/Rescue1 is a family owned business here in New Jersey that has now signed a contract with ( Crimson ) to sell fire apparatus for the state of New Jersey !....
    I confused. Is PL Custom/a builder or a dealer?

    Crimson is bullish on the fire apparatus market. In 2006, their unit sales increased by over 30%.

    http://www.spartanmotors.com/2006_SpartanAR.pdf

    C6

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,588

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by Command6 View Post

    I am not calling you out, but I do wonder about your propensity to promote Pierce so confidently. Are you a user or an employee?

    C6
    O You can be sure that 807 is a user! Of course they put people in jail for that here!

  14. #14
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Command6 View Post
    I confused. Is PL Custom/a builder or a dealer?

    Crimson is bullish on the fire apparatus market. In 2006, their unit sales increased by over 30%.

    http://www.spartanmotors.com/2006_SpartanAR.pdf

    C6
    PL Custom Body Co. is in Manasquan, N.J. and is a really first rate ambulance builder. Their Rescue1 division does rescues of every description. They too, are top of the line. You can find comments on them in many of these threads. We have one PL ambulance and a Rescue1 Special Service on a Freightliner chassis.

    PL was also dealing Seagrave in a segment of central New Jersey. Some of their bigger rescues are built on Seagrave chassis as well as Spartan and HME, not to mention the commercials. I was surprised to see in an earlier post that they had gone to Crimson. FFII, MG3610 or any of you central Jersey/shore guys, any report for us on the change?

    Stay safe out there, everyone goes home!

  15. #15
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,684

    Default

    PL is Crimson dealer, not Seagrave anymore.

    Issues with what Seagrave wanted them to do, how they do it, etc. Parted ways "amicably".
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  16. #16
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,619

    Default

    Wonder if they'll still have access to Seagrave chassis for rescues.

  17. #17
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chiefengineer11 View Post
    Wonder if they'll still have access to Seagrave chassis for rescues.
    My guess is no. I don't think Crimson would take too kindly to that.

    C6

  18. #18
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,619

    Default

    I don't know - unless they're making a serious change to their game plan, fire truck sales is only a small part of their operation. I can't see them declining to build on HME or any other chassis just because Crimson is owned by Spartan. I have to guess, and it's strictly a guess, that it would be whether or not Seagrave would still provide chassis. R1 was building on them long before becoming a Seagrave dealer.

    Stay safe out there, everyone goes home!

  19. #19
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,684

    Default

    R1 will build a rescue on anyone's chassis. YOU just have to purchase the chassis and supply it. They'll build a body for it.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  20. #20
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    National Standards.
    I'll second that with the fact that the manufactures are given a voting interest in these "national standards".

    Their role should be advisory only.

    FTM-PTB

  21. #21
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chiefengineer11 View Post
    PL Custom Body Co. is in Manasquan, N.J. and is a really first rate ambulance builder. Their Rescue1 division does rescues of every description. They too, are top of the line. You can find comments on them in many of these threads. We have one PL ambulance and a Rescue1 Special Service on a Freightliner chassis.

    PL was also dealing Seagrave in a segment of central New Jersey. Some of their bigger rescues are built on Seagrave chassis as well as Spartan and HME, not to mention the commercials. I was surprised to see in an earlier post that they had gone to Crimson. FFII, MG3610 or any of you central Jersey/shore guys, any report for us on the change?

    Stay safe out there, everyone goes home!
    Thanks Chief. I knew I could count on you to set me straight.

  22. #22
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    820

    Default

    Someone said it so I'll chime in...

    The manufacturers of apparatus and equipment have become TOO engranded in the process. The adage of the fox in the hen house comes to mind. They continually change the NFPA standards while not always, atleast in my opinion, for the better. I was incorrect in another post about NFPA 1901 and the requirement of having air in the platform. It was pointed out that it is no longer required and I was incorrect. This is clearly going backwards so why do it? It appears that they are going backwards in the area of standards for no reason other than to justify their existance.

    Second problem, why are engineers, electricians, designers, manufacturers, etc. allowed to sit on the panel and have as much, if not more, say in what is acceptable for our jobs? To tell us what acceptable warning light coverage is. To tell us how many square inches of relective material are necessary for bunker gear and helmets. To tell us how many feet of ground ladders are required on a quint. I assure you they wont let you sit on their panels or boards to determine specifications and requirements for their industries yet they do it to our jobs.

    We need to revamp NFPA and have people who do the job, know the job and have vision for the job on the panels. These are who should determine the needs of our jobs and what is acceptable and what is not.

    I know that someone will say that they are on the panels because the fire service has proven they won't do the right thing all the time if left alone. If that is the case then we need to police ourselves. Have our representation on the panels be accountable to US, the people on the rigs doing the job at 3:00am or 3:00pm, Saturday mornings or Thursday nights.

    Oh well, just my rant.
    Stay low and move it in.

    Be safe.


    Larry

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STATION2 View Post
    Someone said it so I'll chime in...

    The manufacturers of apparatus and equipment have become TOO engranded in the process. The adage of the fox in the hen house comes to mind. They continually change the NFPA standards while not always, atleast in my opinion, for the better. I was incorrect in another post about NFPA 1901 and the requirement of having air in the platform. It was pointed out that it is no longer required and I was incorrect. This is clearly going backwards so why do it? It appears that they are going backwards in the area of standards for no reason other than to justify their existance.

    Second problem, why are engineers, electricians, designers, manufacturers, etc. allowed to sit on the panel and have as much, if not more, say in what is acceptable for our jobs? To tell us what acceptable warning light coverage is. To tell us how many square inches of relective material are necessary for bunker gear and helmets. To tell us how many feet of ground ladders are required on a quint. I assure you they wont let you sit on their panels or boards to determine specifications and requirements for their industries yet they do it to our jobs.

    We need to revamp NFPA and have people who do the job, know the job and have vision for the job on the panels. These are who should determine the needs of our jobs and what is acceptable and what is not.

    I know that someone will say that they are on the panels because the fire service has proven they won't do the right thing all the time if left alone. If that is the case then we need to police ourselves. Have our representation on the panels be accountable to US, the people on the rigs doing the job at 3:00am or 3:00pm, Saturday mornings or Thursday nights.

    Oh well, just my rant.
    as stated above there's many too manufactures of fire equipment that have their hands in the decision making so it benefit themselves, and don't take into consideration the cost it puts on the small depts with limited budgets when they come up with some of these mandates.
    Last edited by towersrock; 10-29-2007 at 08:08 PM.

  24. #24
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STATION2 View Post
    Someone said it so I'll chime in...

    The manufacturers of apparatus and equipment have become TOO engranded in the process. The adage of the fox in the hen house comes to mind. They continually change the NFPA standards while not always, atleast in my opinion, for the better. I was incorrect in another post about NFPA 1901 and the requirement of having air in the platform. It was pointed out that it is no longer required and I was incorrect. This is clearly going backwards so why do it? It appears that they are going backwards in the area of standards for no reason other than to justify their existance.

    Second problem, why are engineers, electricians, designers, manufacturers, etc. allowed to sit on the panel and have as much, if not more, say in what is acceptable for our jobs? To tell us what acceptable warning light coverage is. To tell us how many square inches of relective material are necessary for bunker gear and helmets. To tell us how many feet of ground ladders are required on a quint. I assure you they wont let you sit on their panels or boards to determine specifications and requirements for their industries yet they do it to our jobs.

    We need to revamp NFPA and have people who do the job, know the job and have vision for the job on the panels. These are who should determine the needs of our jobs and what is acceptable and what is not.

    I know that someone will say that they are on the panels because the fire service has proven they won't do the right thing all the time if left alone. If that is the case then we need to police ourselves. Have our representation on the panels be accountable to US, the people on the rigs doing the job at 3:00am or 3:00pm, Saturday mornings or Thursday nights.

    Oh well, just my rant.
    Having been involved in the edges of the NFPA1901 process for a few years, I can totally understand your frustration. And, I am from the "other" side.

    I think it is fair to say that both sides are at fault with the NFPA mess. Safety has become such an issue in the fire service that some people believe they can engineer the human factor completely out of the equation. 1991 was the banner year and until they cut back on the constant revisions, it won't get any better in the near future.

    If you want to see a unique glimpse into the NFPA process, download this ROP for wildland apparatus:

    http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF...-F2005-ROP.pdf

    This is representative of how the process grinds along. In this document, they are attempting to develop, according to their credo, minimum acceptable standards for wildland fire fighting apparatus. Actually, I should say they are attempting to document their minimum acceptable standards into a credo.

    Read page one carefully. Remember, this ain't rocket science, this is wildland firefighting. It is tough, hard, demanding work that is done on a shoestring budget in the middle of nowhere. Most wildland apparatus sits in storage and a lot even gets winterized a good part of the year. How many people on that committee are really relevant except for the firefighters and a few reps from the builders?

    The industry guys are all the usual suspects, just new company names after their's. Presidents and Fire Chiefs.

    You would think that someone from the USDA Forest Service might know something about wildland firefighting, right? They certainly do the bulk of it. Hell, if I was wanting to build your department the wildland unit that was best for the job, I would certainly want to hear what he had to say.

    Read on and see the documented bitch slapping that Dan McKenzie with the USDA Forest Services gets from the committee. I didn't count the number of suggestions he made that got slapped down. Even when they did realize he made sense they would not adopt it his way but bend it to their ideas.

    Poor ol' Dan needs to start going to the meetings on the beaches and send his lackeys to working sessions or something.

    If you actually have nothing better to do than read through this thing you might also note that the Technical Committee ALWAYS gets what it wants. Period. That's the main reason manufacturer's can't always meet "minimum acceptable standards" after a new NFPA publication. I always thought minimum standards had to do with technology available at the time. I never realized that minimums were meant to force manufacturers to pay scads of money on R & D and third party testing in order to force new technology on fire departments that have to scrape for every penny they can find.

    Just my two cents worth.



    Meanwhile, look forward to $250,000.00 wildland units.

  25. #25
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by firepundit View Post
    Having been involved in the edges of the NFPA1901 process for a few years, I can totally understand your frustration. And, I am from the "other" side.

    I think it is fair to say that both sides are at fault with the NFPA mess. Safety has become such an issue in the fire service that some people believe they can engineer the human factor completely out of the equation.

    The industry guys are all the usual suspects, just new company names after their's. Presidents and Fire Chiefs.

    If you actually have nothing better to do than read through this thing you might also note that the Technical Committee ALWAYS gets what it wants. Period. That's the main reason manufacturer's can't always meet "minimum acceptable standards" after a new NFPA publication. I always thought minimum standards had to do with technology available at the time. I never realized that minimums were meant to force manufacturers to pay scads of money on R & D and third party testing in order to force new technology on fire departments that have to scrape for every penny they can find.

    Meanwhile, look forward to $250,000.00 wildland units.
    Sorry about butchering your message, firepundit, it is well written and to the point. I would like to add that I share much of your view.

    I, too, have been involved with the fringes of this process and over the years the NFPA process has almost become a situation where the participants feel they have to make at least some changes. Heck, you can't have a revision if you haven't revised anything. The manufacturers have picked up on this and the bigger ones, that have the money, have staff members that drive, chase, and influence NFPA though committee and other organizations like FAMA.

    The big dogs with the money to spend on emerging technologies and pursue percieved additions to NFPA make darn sure they do everything they can to push those through. It gives them a competitive advantage. It gives them more room for % profit. It takes customers away from those manufacturers who can't keep up. It makes them even bigger and more influential.

    If this keeps up, you can bet on future $250,000 wildland units.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Need input on some apparatus manufacturers
    By FyredUp in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 09-28-2005, 08:58 PM
  2. Wrong place, wrong time...Worcester Lieutenant shot (IOD)
    By Dalmatian90 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-28-2004, 09:18 AM
  3. Manufacturers (Good and Bad)
    By ff43065 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-01-2004, 09:26 PM
  4. HE WAS IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME, NATURALLY
    By MalahatTwo7 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-16-2003, 11:04 AM
  5. Manufacturers!
    By Curt Dawson in forum Fire Buffs' Firehouse
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-27-2001, 06:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register