# Types of clydes



## _hamilton (Aug 24, 2005)

I'm sure someones discussed this before, but a true clyde would be just a bigger fit racer?
All of the small,overweight guys (like me) are just feeling good by the class we fall into.

A true clydesdale horse is not fat, just big and burly.

So I'm just a over-fed quarterhorse? My clyde dream is falling apart already.

If I hit the gym and bulked up....hmmm.


----------



## Hip (Feb 11, 2008)

Im 5'6" around 255 pounds. When I see "Clydes" in pics...they look like fit tall guys. I think we need to start a new class......Burlys


----------



## Psycho Mike (Apr 2, 2006)

Those of us over the 200lb mark are Clydes. We just can't keep up with the ultralights as we have a little too much mass to get and keep going. 

Yes, those of us who ride regularly end up being large and fit. But just like the amateur and recreational classes, there are those who are fit and fast and those just wanting to try racing out. Doesn't really warrant a new calss, IMHO. Besides, with a little work, I know Clydes (myself included) that can keep up quite well with guys half our size (at least in a trail situation....don't know about racing).


----------



## dnlwthrn (Jan 26, 2006)

I think the "clydesdale" category was spawned in the racing scene for those big racers who were at a disadvantage to the flyweights that always win. Since then, at least in mtn. biking, it has come to mean anyone over 200#, regardless of height. According to this description, I'm a clyde. However, I did my first triathlon last year, and felt like a dwarf compared to the guys racing in the clydesdale category. Granted, most of them were 6'4" or taller and RIPPED...

So it all depends on what you're looking for in your category.


----------



## 08nwsula (Oct 19, 2005)

_hamilton said:


> So I'm just an over-fed quarterhorse?


hahaha, that was funny. seriously, just like all species, clydes can come in all shapes and sizes. as long as you are 200+, you are a clyde.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Maybe there should be classes within the clyde catagory.

Clyde being the regular clyde. Then Unter Clyde and Uber clydes as well....= )

I think I would fall into the Uber Clyde Cat.......LOL


----------



## speed metal (Aug 22, 2004)

The Clyde class is a mixed bag of shapes and sizes. You have guys that are under 6 foot and you have guys over 6 foot. Although they are all 200 lbs or more. You have very different levels of fitness. You have the rider that rides for fun and then races every now and then. Then you have the guy 6' 5" 205 lbs that trains 5 days a week and does crits.


----------



## spcarter (Nov 17, 2007)

I'm not sure if I'm a real clyde but I'm ~6' and a fat 210lbs. They should start a "fatties" section. I know I'd fit in there for sure.


----------



## EDDIE JONES (Mar 26, 2005)

spcarter said:


> I'm not sure if I'm a real clyde but I'm ~6' and a fat 210lbs. They should start a "fatties" section. I know I'd fit in there for sure.


Try 5'11" and 275lbs...you are skinny compared to me


----------



## Hip (Feb 11, 2008)

LOL...This has got to be my favorite forum...so many fat jolly bastuds...LOL


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Yea, I'm a fat jolly bastidge for sure. But I can still rail!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Yanner (Dec 20, 2006)

Psycho Mike said:


> Besides, with a little work, I know Clydes (myself included) that can keep up quite well with guys half our size (at least in a trail situation....don't know about racing).


Clyde vs. non clyde. I went back and forth a few times with this guy. He'd pass me on the climbs, I'd catch up and often pass on the technical stuff and descents.


----------



## _hamilton (Aug 24, 2005)

Yanner said:


> Clyde vs. non clyde. I went back and forth a few times with this guy. He'd pass me on the climbs, I'd catch up and often pass on the technical stuff and descents.


Cool picture. That is a cool decent. Where is that?


----------



## ErrantGorgon (Apr 13, 2006)

I am 6'4" 205lbs. I did a clyde class once at a utah point series race and was sneared at by all the other riders who were under 6' but carrying a bit of extra flesh cargo. I never raced clyde again, I had to go back to getting beat by little guys. I have always been unsure who the clyde class was made for. I certainly felt unwelcome at that race even though I was over 200lbs.


----------



## _hamilton (Aug 24, 2005)

ErrantGorgon said:


> I am 6'4" 205lbs. I did a clyde class once at a utah point series race and was sneared at by all the other riders who were under 6' but carrying a bit of extra flesh cargo. I never raced clyde again, I had to go back to getting beat by little guys. I have always been unsure who the clyde class was made for. I certainly felt unwelcome at that race even though I was over 200lbs.


That sux...


----------



## asin (Jan 31, 2005)

I totally agree that we need a distinction here. I'm 6'5" and a ripped 200lbs. I am as quick or quicker than most but my particular issue is more about leverage than sheer mass. I twist stuff very easily and long extended parts (like seatposts, cranks and handlebars) get extra abuse from me. I generally ride smoothly but even the slightest miscalculation can mean a catastrophic end to my gear.

I always found the whole Clydesdale label a bit too broad (no pun intended) to really apply to me. The tall/lean riders are dealing with very different issues from the ones that are heavier. I guess the end result is the same?


----------



## mstaszew (Jul 18, 2007)

asin said:


> I twist stuff very easily and long extended parts (like seatposts, cranks and handlebars) get extra abuse from me. I generally ride smoothly but even the slightest miscalculation can mean a catastrophic end to my gear.
> 
> ...
> 
> The tall/lean riders are dealing with very different issues from the ones that are heavier. I guess the end result is the same?


Sounds like that about sums it up. You tend to damage the extended parts and I damage the other parts. Being a heavier rider, I typically damage the cassette, chain rings, chain, saddle rails, etc. I finally tried a Terry Fly saddle and that has held up great so far, but I just accept the fact that the drivetrain needs a little TLC and replacement a little more often than average. So the end result is that we tear $hit up. I've never really thought about racing, but maybe the Clyde category should be a race based not only on time, but also on who gets back with the most operational bike parts.


----------



## EDDIE JONES (Mar 26, 2005)

mstaszew said:


> Sounds like that about sums it up. You tend to damage the extended parts and I damage the other parts. Being a heavier rider, I typically damage the cassette, chain rings, chain, saddle rails, etc. I finally tried a Terry Fly saddle and that has held up great so far, but I just accept the fact that the drivetrain needs a little TLC and replacement a little more often than average. So the end result is that we tear $hit up. I've never really thought about racing, but maybe the Clyde category should be a race based not only on time, but also on who gets back with the most operational bike parts.


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:rft:rft:rft:rft::thumbsup:


----------



## Norcalgeek41 (Mar 30, 2007)

I'm 6'5" and about 225 right now. I've passed some "classic crosscountry" 150lb riders and I've been passed by other clydes well above my 225. I really enjoyed racing in this division--and there are guys that can fly at 215lbs. Racing is fun and I would encourage anyone to try it! I'm thinking sea otter this year after a three year racing break. 
NCG


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

I'm about 6' 4" with shoes and about 280lbs 290-300 with gear depending on how much tools and water I carry. I ride pretty hard. Hard enough to keep up with my 170lbs buddies. I must be really smooth because I never break parts....and I ride a 5" AM bike that is about 32lbs.

One major advantage of being a clyde is we have all been carrying around all this extra weight over the years, and have developed larger than average muscles underneath our extra padding.
Last year I was down to 260-ish and looked ripped! If I get under 250 I start looking too skinny for my frame size.
BUT, once we can start dropping a bit of weight, we already have a nice bit of muscle mass just waiting for us under there.
I've found it to be a serious advantage once the weight starts coming down.
BLASTED HOLIDAYS!!!!!!!!!!! I hope to be back to 260-270 before June, and next year I plan on keeping it down through the holidays.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

I should correct, Last year I was breaking spokes left and right. I used to carry an extra few with me on longer rides along with a cassette tool. Seemed like anytime I got over 1 foot of air I would snap a spoke.
I went through a couple chains too, most likely because they were hollow pin chains and nowhere near as strong as a normal one.
Since upgrading to better wheels and a SRAM PC991 non hollow pin, I haven't had a single problem.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

mstaszew said:


> So the end result is that we tear $hit up. I've never really thought about racing, but maybe the Clyde category should be a race based not only on time, but also on who gets back with the most operational bike parts.


:thumbsup: I like it. Also, dig the avatar, is that a pitt?


----------



## mstaszew (Jul 18, 2007)

I'm pretty sure it's a boxer, but I must admit that the avatar was shamelessly stolen from a Google image search.


----------



## norm (Feb 20, 2005)

They should have a jiggle test or a squeeze of the "love handles" at starting line, to decide what quaifies a clyde. Some clydesdale arent overweight. 


I would do well at both tests....


----------



## norm (Feb 20, 2005)

Yanner said:


> Clyde vs. non clyde. I went back and forth a few times with this guy. He'd pass me on the climbs, I'd catch up and often pass on the technical stuff and descents.


Hey Yanner....is that the Coffee run at Hardwood???


----------



## ImaKlyde (Sep 6, 2004)

asin said:


> I totally agree that we need a distinction here. I'm 6'5" and a ripped 200lbs. I am as quick or quicker than most but my particular issue is more about leverage than sheer mass. I twist stuff very easily and long extended parts (like seatposts, cranks and handlebars) get extra abuse from me. I generally ride smoothly but even the slightest miscalculation can mean a catastrophic end to my gear.
> 
> I always found the whole Clydesdale label a bit too broad (no pun intended) to really apply to me. The tall/lean riders are dealing with very different issues from the ones that are heavier. I guess the end result is the same?


Try being taller than average and heavier than average. Take 255 pounds into an off-camber hairpin at high speeds or off a 6' to crap tranny all the while having to be on a larger bike/longer seatpost/longer cranks/etc.

I have enough issues. I feel for the uber-clydes that can and do ride aggressively. In my world, clydes are over 225 and 6' tall. Ubers are over 275 and 6'3.

I welcome all fattys that ride though. Racers, those that think they are racers, those that want to be racers and those that just care about having fun. Tall and skinny? Whatever. You are skinny. As the coaches used to say: "They are still just a wannabe pretty boy pencil neck."

You've never had love 'till you've had fat love.

Brock...


----------



## TobyNobody (Mar 17, 2004)

savagemann said:


> I should correct, Last year I was breaking spokes left and right. I used to carry an extra few with me on longer rides along with a cassette tool. Seemed like anytime I got over 1 foot of air I would snap a spoke...


My experience is that broken spokes are a result of a wheel not laced correctly for the rider, or that the spokes have reached the end of their fatigue life (hastened by not lacing correctly). Also, most mass-produced wheels come with cheapo spokes or are too loosely laced for big riders, almost always resulting in broken spokes after a few months of riding.

And when a spoke breaks it is generally because of fatigue - even if it happened at the exact moment of a jump or crash, the spoke was probably at the end of its life and waiting for a reason to break. And if one or two spokes breaks, it's time to get the whole wheel relaced because they are probably all going to start breaking soon.


----------



## Yanner (Dec 20, 2006)

It is hardwood, I don't know what the section is called.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

TobyNobody said:


> My experience is that broken spokes are a result of a wheel not laced correctly for the rider, or that the spokes have reached the end of their fatigue life (hastened by not lacing correctly). Also, most mass-produced wheels come with cheapo spokes or are too loosely laced for big riders, almost always resulting in broken spokes after a few months of riding.
> 
> And when a spoke breaks it is generally because of fatigue - even if it happened at the exact moment of a jump or crash, the spoke was probably at the end of its life and waiting for a reason to break. And if one or two spokes breaks, it's time to get the whole wheel relaced because they are probably all going to start breaking soon.


Yea, agree 100%. I think my problem had alot to do with the previous owner not having his rear derailuer adjusted right, and was sucking his schain into the spokes, thus shaving them down and weakening them quite a bit. I just replaced all the drive side spokes and the problem was solved for the most part.
But getting stronger wheels didn't hurt 1 bit.


----------



## Salinas Steve (Jul 16, 2007)

At 6'4" and 265 I though I was an uber clyde, but not quite. For general riding and parts wear I'd say anyone over 200 is a clyde. For racing 6'4" and 210 can be pretty fit. So some of the races I've been to have catagories, ie beginer, sport, ect. So if your the really fit guy and getting that look, sign for the more advanced. Just a thought.

Are they going to make a 3X mtbr jersey?


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

3XTall please.............= )


----------



## beanfink (Nov 22, 2006)

*The True Meaning of Clydesdale*

I think the true test of whether or not you're a "real" Clyde is whether your riding weight is actually on the suspension setup charts.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Nice 1 bean. I had a RS SID fork and the charts only went up to 170-180 lbs rider. I then decided I needed a different fork......LOL


----------



## big rick (Mar 8, 2008)

*CLYDE IS CLYDE - SHAKA TO YOU ALL ! *

Race season is here!

Yeah and at so many races we have a Clydesdale class. I am one of those 6-3 220 lb guys that rides towards the front, but throws out some knuckle bones to the other big-guys at the finish.

I wish all the bigger riders the best this season.

If anyone wants some REALLY cool equalized Clydes racing come to the Praire City Race Series in Folsom (Sac) Ca. * If you are a "too fit" big guy up you go to exp,SS, or other.

If you want a category for your buddy/gal you'll find it at this series- www.racemtb.com


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

I'm 6'1" - when I used to ride 3x a week and have these gigantic, huge legs and a big gut, I weighed 254 lbs (naked) - maybe 260+ with all my gear on? I could make a brand new XT drivetrain skip on a steep singletrack climb. THAT is clyde.

Then I quit riding completely for the last 7 years.

I golfed a lot and started going to the gym with my wife a ton. I now weigh more like 212 (naked). The harder I push on those pedals, the more my bike just shoots up the hill. Things are just different now as far as climbing goes. Although I fit the definition of clyde, there are very different challenges to riding now.

One thing I think I remember is that clyde used to be 215 or 225 for racing and now its all the way down to 200 lbs? When did that happen?


----------



## beanfink (Nov 22, 2006)

*Skipping Drivetrain*

I weigh 300lbs, and unfortunately most of it is here to stay.

I used to have terrible problems with my drivetrain on steep climbs. Once the torque exceeded a certain level, pop! there goes the chain.

I changed frames (Heckler to Nomad) and built a new rear wheel with a Mavic EX729 rim, a DT Swiss 440 hub, a steel freehub body, and a 10mm RWS.

You know what? It still skipped.

One day my buddy and I were riding at Oat Hill and he noticed what was happening. Said buddy is a veteran shop mechanic. He tensioned the derailer cable just right, and since then, not a peep.

Go figure.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Maybe some of my lack of breaking parts like chains and such is due to the fact that I am also a mechanic, and keep everything finely tuned. I'm sure it helps.


----------



## Random Drivel (Oct 20, 2006)

savagemann said:


> Maybe some of my lack of breaking parts like chains and such is due to the fact that I am also a mechanic, and keep everything finely tuned. I'm sure it helps.


Have to agree with that--- I maintain my bike after each ride and have yet to have an incident on the trail (other than a flat). Former Mechanic.


----------



## DrNickels (Jan 7, 2008)

I think I am a uberclyde 

6 foot
295 lbs without gear

A little fat around the middle though but legs of muscle.


----------



## big rick (Mar 8, 2008)

*Clydes*

Firestone- SB . end of April is 220# event.

Sea Otter has been 200 lbs, so last year I tapper down to 203 , hardwork! Further I think big guys are stronger when big.

Our Clydes Class in Nor Cal- is totally cool, and grass roots. Many riders know eachother, and wait at line to stoke eachother out.

This year my Clydes racing sched, is somewhat reduced.

*No Exp Clyde at SOC

* Lemurian, or Firestone

*** Keyesville Classic- Yep the one & olny, is a NORBA NCS race- the crew will be there.

Stay intouch with your plans!

Big Rick


----------



## Salinas Steve (Jul 16, 2007)

beanfink said:


> I think the true test of whether or not you're a "real" Clyde is whether your riding weight is actually on the suspension setup charts.


EXACTLEY ! 
 big rick, Cool race series. I just live too far away for a Wed. race, ah maybe.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

We're both UberClydes DrNickels.


----------



## pcguy (Feb 28, 2008)

6 foot 4 inches @ 320lbs..

Ultra clyde, or Ultra Fat *SS LOL?


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

pcguy said:


> 6 foot 4 inches @ 320lbs..
> 
> Ultra clyde, or Ultra Fat *SS LOL?


UberClyde as well.


----------



## sean salach (Sep 15, 2007)

maybe the clydesdale class should be based on something closer to bmi? a calculation based on height and weight. i poke my head in here every now and then, and by the current, technical definition, i could race the clydesdale class if i wanted. but at 6'4" and around 200lbs, i am a "pencil neck" compared to those that have a right to be in the clyde class.


----------



## gurpurdy (Jul 2, 2004)

*Race courses*

I am 6'2 205 and in pretty good shape. I raced last year in my age group bracket because I thought I was getting fast enough to keep up with the little guys. It has been my experience that it really depends on how hilly the course is. On the flatter courses I can hold my own quite well. On any course where the name includes "mountain", I get smoked by the same guys. I think the clyde division was created because of that very reason. The larger guys, in shape or not cannot compete when the course gets hilly and they cannot get close in the power to weight ratio.


----------



## dwnhlldav (Feb 2, 2006)

dnlwthrn said:


> I think the "clydesdale" category was spawned in the racing scene for those big racers who were at a disadvantage to the flyweights that always win. Since then, at least in mtn. biking, it has come to mean anyone over 200#, regardless of height. According to this description, I'm a clyde. However, I did my first triathlon last year, and felt like a dwarf compared to the guys racing in the clydesdale category. Granted, most of them were 6'4" or taller and RIPPED...
> 
> So it all depends on what you're looking for in your category.


I'm signed up for my first Tri as well. Looking at last years times. The slow clydes are way faster then the slow guys in my age group. At least I smoked a bunch of skinny fackers in the water last weekend at a swim clinic.


----------



## DirtyREIGN (Mar 10, 2008)

This is freaken hilarious!!!! I'm reading the threads and can't believe I'm not the only one!! I'm new here and was just introduced to the Clydedale division just Thursday.My buddy who's a skinny 5'9 150lb wizzle (bless his little heart) used to race all of the time in XC. He flys up and down the hill without breaking a sweat. 
So anyways I asked him to go riding the other day :madman: cause I wanted to see where my riding was from last year. I have been spending alot of time on the trails and in the gym ( spinning) and to my amazement I still have A LONG WAYS TO GO!! He's always the one leading the pack on huge rides with our crew. He's also the one that says hey I'm gonna go see where FUBAR is at?? Of course I'm off the saddle walking up some really lame climb (hate climbing), sucking wind and about to faint. Meanwhile so we stop to take breather and he says you have been riding alot! I think cool:thumbsup: I'm starting to improve on my cardio endurance. Legs feel like jelly but hey who cares and so I asked him about racing that he did and he said you know you should enter one of the circuits here in the area and I said huh?? He's like no really I'm serious, you could enter the Clydesdale division. I think dang now dudes cracken jokes while I'm dying here. I start bustin up laughen and he say no really there's a division that's over 200lbs. It's called the Clydesdale division. I think you would do really good. I was like no way he's freaken serious. So now he has me thinking... But when I found this forum I felt like I was at home This place is awesome!!! oh yeah 5'11 and a uh um, "_HUSKIE"_ 230lb no gear. Looks can be really decieving.  You guys are awesome! A regular support group and it's free. Kinda like the "La Leche Legue"!:ihih:


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Welcome to the club DIrtyReign!!!!!!
I was stoked when I found this section here at MTBR. It's like a home away from home, far from home.....LOL



DirtyREIGN said:


> This is freaken hilarious!!!! I'm reading the threads and can't believe I'm not the only one!! I'm new here and was just introduced to the Clydedale division just Thursday.My buddy who's a skinny 5'9 150lb wizzle (bless his little heart) used to race all of the time in XC. He flys up and down the hill without breaking a sweat.
> So anyways I asked him to go riding the other day :madman: cause I wanted to see where my riding was from last year. I have been spending alot of time on the trails and in the gym ( spinning) and to my amazement I still have A LONG WAYS TO GO!! He's always the one leading the pack on huge rides with our crew. He's also the one that says hey I'm gonna go see where FUBAR is at?? Of course I'm off the saddle walking up some really lame climb (hate climbing), sucking wind and about to faint. Meanwhile so we stop to take breather and he says you have been riding alot! I think cool:thumbsup: I'm starting to improve on my cardio endurance. Legs feel like jelly but hey who cares and so I asked him about racing that he did and he said you know you should enter one of the circuits here in the area and I said huh?? He's like no really I'm serious, you could enter the Clydesdale division. I think dang now dudes cracken jokes while I'm dying here. I start bustin up laughen and he say no really there's a division that's over 200lbs. It's called the Clydesdale division. I think you would do really good. I was like no way he's freaken serious. So now he has me thinking... But when I found this forum I felt like I was at home This place is awesome!!! oh yeah 5'11 and a uh um, "_HUSKIE"_ 230lb no gear. Looks can be really decieving.  You guys are awesome! A regular support group and it's free. Kinda like the "La Leche Legue"!:ihih:


----------



## scottyperkins (Oct 29, 2006)

_hamilton said:


> A true clydesdale horse is not fat, just big and burly.
> 
> So I'm just a over-fed quarterhorse?


I guess that makes me an over-fed...

...clydesdale. :thumbsup:


----------



## Black Earth (Jan 16, 2006)

Big and tall, I am 6.2 tall and come in at 210lbs...Been racing since 1987. I can hang with the bike jockeys on short steep climbs, but they do get me on climbs longer that 15-20 mins...:thumbsup:


----------



## speed metal (Aug 22, 2004)

*50 cents a pound*

OK clydes he is the race for you. http://www.bikebutler.com/MTB/clydesdales.html I did the race in 05 and broke the axle in my rear wheel. At the time I was 203 and got some of "those' looks on the line. Plus! 50 cent for every pound the winner weights.:eekster: also check here on the lower right side. the flyer from last year.
http://www.bikebutler.com/MTB/flyer.html


----------



## tydydownthehighway (Nov 13, 2006)

I remember doing that race in the late 90s. They used to knock time off for the more you weigh. I was 6'3" and around 216 back then. But the bigger guys(full figured) use to take the top prizes. I did the Clydesdale class when it was first offered at the Iceman I use to do top 10-20 during those first few years. Then the tall buff guys came in, and knocked me out of contension. Now that race has two clydes catagories beginner and sport/expert. In fact,when I lived in Michigan, most of the races in the MMBA point series had a beginner and sport/expert clyde. The last few that I did were really fun, because the same guys raced in them. It was fun being at the starting line talking beer and munchies as opposed to talking Heart rate and cadance. I'm at 6'3" 240 now. I don't race much anymore ,but when I do ,I go in the old fart catagory. Everybody stops when you do, to make sure your still alive


----------



## ZEKEDAWG (Aug 13, 2007)

Sorry to grave dig but, I am entering my first race tomorrow as a Clyde. Currently at 221 lbs and 5'8" down from 301. So I was and am one of the shortest and fattest dudes in this thread. I ride 10 + miles 6-7 days a week and after reading this I am pumped up. Thanks. 

I too just want to see where I am at in terms of others. I am happy to know there is a categorey for us, so when a Clyde, beats a twig boy it hurts even more.


----------



## Hip (Feb 11, 2008)

tydydownthehighway said:


> I'm at 6'3" 240 now. I don't race much anymore ,but when I do ,I go in the old fart catagory. Everybody stops when you do, to make sure your still alive


Hahahahaha....Thats great!:thumbsup:


----------



## AHTOXA (Feb 18, 2008)

Ah yes... 

6'7" and 220lbs here. 

I'm slim but could be in better shape just a bit. I still get passed by smaller and lighter riders. I used to ride road and then smoked for a number of years. Still getting my lungs in shape.


----------



## fulcrum1 (Apr 3, 2007)

6'5, 245lbs, 15% body fat, 34" waist with a 35" inseam. Not too many people with my body type on the American River Bike trail...

I lift three times a week and used to run quite a bit....but that became old quickly so I decided to cross train with riding and hitting laps in the pools. By far the best thing I ever did. My run times dropped and I think I might have extended the life on my knees. I'm 27 and already have that gut feeling I won't be recovering quite like I used to. 

I ride a GF 29er and a Trek Hybrid and am looking for a Tricross bike I can ride just about anywhere. I love this sport and this site, which has been a wealth of info for big guys like myself.


----------

