Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 52

Thread: M52 Turbo/Manifold Combos, Whats trash whats not?

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,375
    My Cars
    E36 Turbo
    Quote Originally Posted by E36Mylo View Post
    I'll be selling my 6262 63 AR If you're still shopping for one in the next few weeks. And contrary to popular beliefs and keyboard scientists this little air snail has about 30+ 130+mph traps at 19-20 psi. You don't need a bigger turbo for the street, just drive one if you get a chance, instead of letting dyno sheets and data logs that don't mean shit in real life decide for you.
    I feel like this was directed towards me/my posts...

    re. popular beliefs and keyboard scientists, dyno sheets and data logs not meaning shit in real life (because I guess data is fictional?)... that's a pretty funny thing to say coming from someone who probably hasn't had any seat time in other setups on the same/similar platform. Telling people you don't need a bigger turbo for the street pretty much confirms that.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Methuen, MA
    Posts
    441
    My Cars
    1999 BMW M3 Coupe
    Quote Originally Posted by NOTORIOUS VR View Post
    I feel like this was directed towards me/my posts...

    re. popular beliefs and keyboard scientists, dyno sheets and data logs not meaning shit in real life (because I guess data is fictional?)... that's a pretty funny thing to say coming from someone who probably hasn't had any seat time in other setups on the same/similar platform. Telling people you don't need a bigger turbo for the street pretty much confirms that.
    Never said it was fictional, just stated they don't transfer over to real life like people think they do. And I have driven cars with different setups, 1jz,2jz cars, ej powered high hp cars, Turbo hondas, big turbo, small turbos, you don't know me lol. But what I can tell you is, people who chase numbers and fall in love with all those dyno sheets and data logs end up doing just that, chasing numbers a lot more than enjoying their cars and actually racing. On paper I was told I wasn't gonna make 450, I was going to be choking hp, not going to go 125, this and that. You know what I did? Just drove.


    PTE6262 .63 A/R, Stock S52, Cutring/Copper Spacer/Arp Studs Combo, Water Methanol Injected
    10.9@131mph. #AngerMotorsports

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,375
    My Cars
    E36 Turbo
    Quote Originally Posted by E36Mylo View Post
    Never said it was fictional, just stated they don't transfer over to real life like people think they do.
    Of course they transfer over... If you actually know what you're looking for with the data. Saying it doesn't transfer over to real life is just a bunch of nonsense.

    And I have driven cars with different setups, 1jz,2jz cars, ej powered high hp cars, Turbo hondas, big turbo, small turbos, you don't know me lol. But what I can tell you is, people who chase numbers and fall in love with all those dyno sheets and data logs end up doing just that, chasing numbers a lot more than enjoying their cars and actually racing. On paper I was told I wasn't gonna make 450, I was going to be choking hp, not going to go 125, this and that. You know what I did? Just drove.
    I don't know you, but you certainly seem to believe a lot of fiction.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Methuen, MA
    Posts
    441
    My Cars
    1999 BMW M3 Coupe
    Quote Originally Posted by NOTORIOUS VR View Post
    Of course they transfer over... If you actually know what you're looking for with the data. Saying it doesn't transfer over to real life is just a bunch of nonsense.



    I don't know you, but you certainly seem to believe a lot of fiction.
    Sure lol let's go with that then. Guess my time slips were all fictional as well. Data logging is useful to correct issues. To just build cars around other people's data and dyno sheets before even testing stuff out on your own is absurd in my opinion, but what do I know. You believe in dynos, I believe in real world results. Guess that's fairy land here on this forum. Seems that way anyways.
    Last edited by E36Mylo; 07-15-2018 at 01:16 PM.


    PTE6262 .63 A/R, Stock S52, Cutring/Copper Spacer/Arp Studs Combo, Water Methanol Injected
    10.9@131mph. #AngerMotorsports

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,375
    My Cars
    E36 Turbo
    Quote Originally Posted by E36Mylo View Post
    Sure lol let's go with that then. Guess my time slips were all fictional as well.
    I don't even get what point you're trying to make. What does YOUR car have to do with any of this? You're taking this personal because you have a 6262? you think that what you did with your car is special? you think that it's unique or the only one? Please help me understand.

    Data logging is useful to correct issues. To just build cars around other people's data and dyno sheets before even testing stuff out on your own is absurd in my opinion, but what do I know. You believe in dynos, I believe in real world results. Guess that's fairy land here on this forum. Seems that way anyways.
    You seem to think you know a lot of about me and make a ton of assumptions. You're welcome to believe what you want, but again you seem to believe in a lot of fiction and deny yourself a lot of truths.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Renton, Wa
    Posts
    5,429
    My Cars
    98 m3





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1989 535i - sold
    1999 M3 Tiag/Dove - sold
    1998 M3 Turbo Arctic/black - current
    2004 Built motor TiAg/Black - Sold
    2008 E61 19T Turbo-Wagon - current
    2011 E82 135i - S85 Swap - current
    1998 M3 Cosmos S54 swapped Sedan - current

    1998 Turbo: PTE6870 | 1.15 ar | Hp Cover, Custom Divided T4 bottom-mount, 3.5" SS exhaust, Dual Turbosmart Compgates, Turbosmart Raceport BOV, 3.5" Treadstone Intercooler, 3.5" Vibrant resonator and muffler, Arp 2k Headstuds | Arp 2k Main studs | 87mm Je pistons | Eagle rods | 9.2:1 static compression, Ces 87mm cutring, Custom solid rear subframe bushings, Akg 85d diff bushings, 4 clutch 3.15 diff, , Poly engine mounts, UUC trans mounts W/ enforcers, 22RPD OBD2 Stock ECU id1700 E85 tune, 22RPD Big power Transmission swap w/ GS6-53

  7. #32
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Methuen, MA
    Posts
    441
    My Cars
    1999 BMW M3 Coupe
    Quote Originally Posted by NOTORIOUS VR View Post
    I don't even get what point you're trying to make. What does YOUR car have to do with any of this? You're taking this personal because you have a 6262? you think that what you did with your car is special? you think that it's unique or the only one? Please help me understand.



    You seem to think you know a lot of about me and make a ton of assumptions. You're welcome to believe what you want, but again you seem to believe in a lot of fiction and deny yourself a lot of truths.
    I'm using MY car as an example because I race it and I know first hand how all the internet savvy data logging dyno queen cars seem to spend years chasing the best setup for this and that without actually trying to go out there and just do real world driving and racing. Nobody ever said anything about you, I don't know you, don't care to either. You addressed ME, not the other way around. I never said my car was special or what I did was special, I'm just using it as an example because I saw previous replies mention the 6262 and even saw other people mention MY car as an example. So I shared MY opinion and info on real world racing and driving. I was giving MY reasoning and proof that you don't need a huge turbo and the fanciest manifold. idk your build or your car but if it isn't special to do what I did, please do me the favor and go drive your car to the track, run a 10 second pass, and drive it home. I'll be right here waiting... Make sure you don't forget your laptop.
    Last edited by E36Mylo; 07-15-2018 at 02:17 PM.


    PTE6262 .63 A/R, Stock S52, Cutring/Copper Spacer/Arp Studs Combo, Water Methanol Injected
    10.9@131mph. #AngerMotorsports

  8. #33
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Methuen, MA
    Posts
    441
    My Cars
    1999 BMW M3 Coupe
    As a side note, I just re read the original post the op made regarding questions about a manifold / turbo combo, to see if I was the crazy one, he's literally referencing a pte 62mm and a spa manifold, both of which I have, and have had real world success with and proven it over and over, yet "what does my car have anything to do with this" the guy is literally asking for advice from people who might have experiences with these things yet I'm the one thats believing in fiction and not truths. Lol I'm done now. I'll go back to not using this site and app. Reminds me of local hard parker car meets.


    PTE6262 .63 A/R, Stock S52, Cutring/Copper Spacer/Arp Studs Combo, Water Methanol Injected
    10.9@131mph. #AngerMotorsports

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Manchester, N.H.
    Posts
    16,712
    My Cars
    96 332IS 6466 turbo
    Quote Originally Posted by vollosso View Post





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Been a while since there has been some fun on the forums. Its nice to see some enthusiasm and passion.
    1996 332IS
    Built 3.2
    CES/Steed TS Precision 6466, spraying a "$π!℅" load of meth.
    Technique Tuning 80# tune.
    1/4 mile 10.84 @ 136.72
    Your 1 and only stop for all your BMW performance needs
    WWW.CESMOTORSPORT.COM

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,375
    My Cars
    E36 Turbo
    Quote Originally Posted by E36Mylo View Post
    I'm using MY car as an example because I race it and I know first hand how all the internet savvy data logging dyno queen cars seem to spend years chasing the best setup for this and that without actually trying to go out there and just do real world driving and racing.
    So what, plenty of people race their cars... You're arguing a completely moot point.

    You talk about internet dyno queen cars, whats it to you if someone wants to chase numbers on a rolling drum? Does that make them any less successful in what they're doing compared to what you think you're doing?

    Nobody ever said anything about you, I don't know you, don't care to either. You addressed ME, not the other way around. I never said my car was special or what I did was special, I'm just using it as an example because I saw previous replies mention the 6262 and even saw other people mention MY car as an example. So I shared MY opinion and info on real world racing and driving. I was giving MY reasoning and proof that you don't need a huge turbo and the fanciest manifold. idk your build or your car but if it isn't special to do what I did, please do me the favor and go drive your car to the track, run a 10 second pass, and drive it home. I'll be right here waiting... Make sure you don't forget your laptop.
    I addressed you since I am the only one in the thread to say the 6262 is not a good fit, and you seemed to take that personally somehow.. I took your reply just as personal as what I do requires me to allow data to be a big part of allowing me to make decisions. You saying that data doesn't translate is completely and utterly false. Without data YOUR car wouldn't be what and where it is plain and simple.

    I suppose you want a pat on your back for banging off a 10 second pass... I'll see if I can figure out how to do that from my laptop one day.

    Just think that if you had your car built with a 6466 we'd be in agreement right now
    Last edited by NOTORIOUS VR; 07-15-2018 at 02:52 PM.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Methuen, MA
    Posts
    441
    My Cars
    1999 BMW M3 Coupe
    Quote Originally Posted by NOTORIOUS VR View Post
    So what, plenty of people race their cars... You're arguing a completely moot point.

    You talk about internet dyno queen cars, whats it to you if someone wants to chase numbers on a rolling drum? Does that make them any less successful in what they're doing compared to what you think you're doing?



    I addressed you since I am the only one in the thread to say the 6262 is not a good fit, and you seemed to take that personally somehow.. I took your reply just as personal as what I do requires me to allow data to be a big part of allowing me to make decisions. You saying that data doesn't translate is completely and utterly false. Without data YOUR car wouldn't be what and where it is plain and simple.

    I suppose you want a pat on your back for banging off a 10 second pass... I'll see if I can figure out how to do that from my laptop one day.

    Just think that if you had your car built with a 6466 we'd all be in agreement right now
    I'm going to make my point very clear. You stated the 6262 was lazy in comparison, you stated the 6466 would be a better fit. Both turbos of which I have the real world experience with, mine having the 6262 and butters with a 6466. We both race. The reason why I bring mine up is because the op asked for advice using a spa manifold and a 62mm. My whole point is you claim the 6262 is lazy in comparison because of your data, when in REAL LIFE I have evidence to prove that isn't true. Now tell me again how it's a moot point? I have real physical slips cutting 1.6s and 1.7s on this turbo setup you claim is lazier than others. This is my entire point of saying sometimes stuff doesn't translate to real life. Just because your laptop tells you it'd work better and flow better, real life racing might say otherwise. You're advising someone with what is essentially a 3.0l, to go for a 6466 on a log style manifold because your data says so. I hope he does take your advice. So you can see how shitty that would actually be in real life. Especially at the drag strip.


    PTE6262 .63 A/R, Stock S52, Cutring/Copper Spacer/Arp Studs Combo, Water Methanol Injected
    10.9@131mph. #AngerMotorsports

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,375
    My Cars
    E36 Turbo
    Quote Originally Posted by E36Mylo View Post
    My whole point is you claim the 6262 is lazy in comparison because of your data
    No YOU said/claimed that I did, when in fact I never said any such thing.

    when in REAL LIFE I have evidence to prove that isn't true.
    You don't have any evidence to prove that (whatever you that is) at all actually

    I have real physical slips cutting 1.6s and 1.7s on this turbo setup you claim is lazier than others.
    You think your turbo is related to your 60' times???

    This is my entire point of saying sometimes stuff doesn't translate to real life. Just because your laptop tells you it'd work better and flow better, real life racing might say otherwise. You're advising someone with what is essentially a 3.0l, to go for a 6466 on a log style manifold because your data says so.
    I hope he does take your advice.
    You seem to have a reading comprehension issue. I never once said or eluded to anything of the sort.

    So you can see how shitty that would actually be in real life. Especially at the drag strip.
    And you know that how?

  13. #38
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Methuen, MA
    Posts
    441
    My Cars
    1999 BMW M3 Coupe
    Quote Originally Posted by NOTORIOUS VR View Post
    I never said it wouldn't make power... I said they choke....

    The 6262 on the 3L (M52) made 619 around 21 psi on a DJ.... but it was at it's limit (power/TQ dropping off sharply). Also if I compare to my 2.9 M52 with a 4094R, the 6262 combo just seems lazy to me in power delivery, it certainly doesn't have the aggressiveness of a more free-flowing turbo has effect wise on these motors. I'd be willing to bet that a 6466 would be a far better match all around than a 6262.
    So this isn't you saying it's lazy in comparison to those? And this is also you saying that a 6466 would be a better choice. So who has the reading comprehension issues now?

    And 60' times and 1/8 mile times and trap almost directly relate to responsiveness of turbos and acceleration. I've trapped 102.4mph to the 1/8th on my 6262 setup on a spa, while others have gone slower with much bigger turbos and better manifolds. How can you say that's not real proof?
    Last edited by E36Mylo; 07-15-2018 at 03:56 PM.


    PTE6262 .63 A/R, Stock S52, Cutring/Copper Spacer/Arp Studs Combo, Water Methanol Injected
    10.9@131mph. #AngerMotorsports

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,375
    My Cars
    E36 Turbo
    Quote Originally Posted by E36Mylo View Post
    So this isn't you saying it's lazy in comparison to those?
    Yes I said it seems lazy to me in power delivery... in seat of the pants driving back to back of the 3L 6262 car vs my own 2.9L 4094R car. I know what I said, what point are you trying to make.

    And this is also you saying that a 6466 would be a better choice.
    It was me saying that I believe a 6466 would be an all round better choice, yes. Again, where is the part that you actually start to make a point?

    So who has the reading comprehension issues now?
    Obviously still you.

    And 60' times and 1/8 mile times and trap almost directly relate to responsiveness of turbos and acceleration.
    LOL WUT?

    I've trapped 102.4mph to the 1/8th on my 6262 setup on a spa, while others have gone slower with much bigger turbos and better manifolds. How can you say that's not real proof?
    It proves that you went faster. It doesn't at all prove that it was because of your manifold and turbo choice.

    Still waiting for you to make a valid point with all of this.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Methuen, MA
    Posts
    441
    My Cars
    1999 BMW M3 Coupe
    Quote Originally Posted by NOTORIOUS VR View Post
    Yes I said it seems lazy to me in power delivery... in seat of the pants driving back to back of the 3L 6262 car vs my own 2.9L 4094R car. I know what I said, what point are you trying to make.



    It was me saying that I believe a 6466 would be an all round better choice, yes. Again, where is the part that you actually start to make a point?



    Obviously still you.



    LOL WUT?



    It proves that you went faster. It doesn't at all prove that it was because of your manifold and turbo choice.

    Still waiting for you to make a valid point with all of this.
    You said you didn't say that, I showed where you said just that. Now you're saying I know what I said but I'm still wrong. Lol Okay. Agree to disagree.


    PTE6262 .63 A/R, Stock S52, Cutring/Copper Spacer/Arp Studs Combo, Water Methanol Injected
    10.9@131mph. #AngerMotorsports

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,375
    My Cars
    E36 Turbo
    Quote Originally Posted by E36Mylo View Post
    You said you didn't say that, I showed where you said just that. Now you're saying I know what I said but I'm still wrong. Lol Okay. Agree to disagree.
    No I said I didn't say what YOU said I did.. It's not at all the same thing.

    I am absolutely aware of what I said.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    25,402
    My Cars
    F90 M5; E36 M3 Turbo
    6466 is a better choice for >600 rwhp. 6262 is the better choice for <500 rwhp. Between 500 and 600 rwhp, there could be some debate. I’d probably take the 6262 sized turbo, having had a GT3582R, GTX4088R, EFR8374 and EFR9180.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    160
    My Cars
    e30 318i, 135i
    I have a 6262 on an RSI manifold on my OBD2 m50b25tu.
    It is a lag machine.

    I originally sized it based on the M52b28 i had originally but that engine was trashed before i got to fit it.
    Will soon be building the spare M50 in the back of the garage with m54b30 crank bored to 86.5 and running JE 9:1 pistons i.e. S52 clone bottom end.
    I think the extra 0.7l will definitely help in the lag department20170805_180322.jpg

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Renton, Wa
    Posts
    5,429
    My Cars
    98 m3
    Low compression 2.5l’s are lag buckets. I refuse to drive them xD


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1989 535i - sold
    1999 M3 Tiag/Dove - sold
    1998 M3 Turbo Arctic/black - current
    2004 Built motor TiAg/Black - Sold
    2008 E61 19T Turbo-Wagon - current
    2011 E82 135i - S85 Swap - current
    1998 M3 Cosmos S54 swapped Sedan - current

    1998 Turbo: PTE6870 | 1.15 ar | Hp Cover, Custom Divided T4 bottom-mount, 3.5" SS exhaust, Dual Turbosmart Compgates, Turbosmart Raceport BOV, 3.5" Treadstone Intercooler, 3.5" Vibrant resonator and muffler, Arp 2k Headstuds | Arp 2k Main studs | 87mm Je pistons | Eagle rods | 9.2:1 static compression, Ces 87mm cutring, Custom solid rear subframe bushings, Akg 85d diff bushings, 4 clutch 3.15 diff, , Poly engine mounts, UUC trans mounts W/ enforcers, 22RPD OBD2 Stock ECU id1700 E85 tune, 22RPD Big power Transmission swap w/ GS6-53

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C., Canada
    Posts
    8,162
    My Cars
    '97 M3
    Data is only useful if you know how to use it, know what to look for and what all the variables are. Even using a time slip, which is also data, there are many variables involved.

    It wasn’t mentioned above but a 60’ time relates mostly to the tire and chassis set up (even better if it’s an auto tranny) and not to how fast a turbo spools. There are shitty old fox body Mustangs with half the hp that can do a 60’ in almost half the time it takes me as well as cars with monster turbos that have spooled up well before the lights turns green.

    A fast spooling turbo can be more enjoyable in traffic, autox, road racing and in the twisties; slower spooling turbos are better at roll racing, drag racing, Texas mile events and peak dyno numbers. It all depends on what you are into. Drag racing is not the end all be all for everyone. I think road racing/HPDE track days are way more fun but I still do the occasional drag race for shits and giggles.
    Last edited by chikinhed; 07-16-2018 at 08:51 PM.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    160
    My Cars
    e30 318i, 135i
    Quote Originally Posted by vollosso View Post
    Low compression 2.5l’s are lag buckets. I refuse to drive them xD
    Wasnt my first choice but just wanted it running while i worked on bigger things. Then life gets in the way and you're suddenly still in almost the same place you were 2 years ago

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    My S366 would happily make 30 lbs of boost in neutral with antilag. I typically left the line with 20-24 lbs of boost.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Hackettstown, NJ
    Posts
    1,997
    My Cars
    1998 328i
    Taking in as much data from this thread as I can since I’m in the same boat right now. I want to shoot for ~580whp on a factory internals 2.8 with 93, but I’m unsure of what turbo to go with.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,043
    My Cars
    97' m52 turbo
    First off I have the 6262 and the SPA manifold on a 2.8 with 22rpd base tune and love it. The lag is minimal and I haven't even found a need to turn up the boost or bother Zack for more power, yet. I'm STILL on a 7 PSI spring and everyone who has ridden in the car with me has said its the fastest one they've been in. I've put almost 3,000 miles on it

    To say the 6262 is no good is stupid as its basically the PTE equiv to the garrets 35 series. And how many I6's saw/seen gt35/gtx35 turbos? A lot... All depends on what you want. I think I've used my data logger, once

    Lets save the negative criticism for the guys who doubt these cars or their power plants in general. We're all trying to achieve similar goals here...

    I think 550 is the safe number on 93 but some people push it. I would aim 400 for a good, reliable, and fun car. But its yours , if you wanna max it out there are tuners who can do it.

    But I think the 6262 or GTX35R would be fun :-). 6262 says its rated for 700 but I can't confirm it
    Last edited by 328iFun; 07-18-2018 at 06:51 PM.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    Quote Originally Posted by 96bmftw View Post
    Taking in as much data from this thread as I can since I’m in the same boat right now. I want to shoot for ~580whp on a factory internals 2.8 with 93, but I’m unsure of what turbo to go with.
    Garrett GTW3476, 6262, Borg Warner S362sxe would all be good choices.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. E36 Need m50 m52 turbo manifold
    By emir in forum Forced & Chemical Induction Parts
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-01-2013, 09:02 PM
  2. E36 M52 turbo manifold in need
    By emir in forum Forced & Chemical Induction Parts
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-05-2013, 02:44 PM
  3. M50 or M52 Turbo manifold Brand new
    By GDnimr0d in forum Engines, Performance Parts & Software
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-31-2009, 02:46 PM
  4. e30 M52 turbo manifold...
    By Hova in forum Forced Induction
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-27-2009, 10:24 PM
  5. Please someone help me!! M52 Turbo Manifold
    By slve30m3 in forum Forced Induction
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-19-2008, 12:52 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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