# Iwa-oh-my-GOAAAAAARRRrrrrggg!%#@$!&*!!



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

I am VERY VERY frustrated at the moment!  This isn't suppose to happen, I have a new respect for a certain group of people right now.

I got this Manten stone, 10 pounds. I was not happy with what I got, the stuff is too heavy so I didn't get enough for the large tank I wanted to use it in. And I wish I could've picked them out myself, I don't like them and I don't feel like they work together. 

Well, I'm in the middle of moving and decided to put my 8gl Finnex reef to rest as I get ready for multiple breakdowns. In the meantime, I figure it's a great chance to utilize these stones with the empty tank sitting around [they don't stay empty for long around here  ]. 

Never in my life would I imagine how difficult it is to create one of these Iwagumi things. Maybe the stones aren't right, the tank is too tight, or maybe I'm just overreacting and hitting a creative block. I think it would be much easier with a larger tank and lots of stone to work with, but I want to take this opportunity to apologize to all you ADA freaks who I never really took seriously, and for ever considering the 'paint by numbers' concept!

I've been looking at a lot of other hardscapes and following this article, but nothing feels like it's working out. Maybe if I show you guys what I've done so far you can help me see things more clearly. I think a big problem of mine is that I always have a hard time seeing how plants will work with a hardscape, and I get overly critical about it from the get go. 

Here's what I got so far in order of progression, I tried lots of variations in between with more or less rock and different adjustments, and took shots of what I thought looked best...

1









2









2b









3









4










Opinions? Critiques? TIA -J


----------



## finfan (Jun 16, 2008)

i like formation #2 and #5 best


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

Thanks finfan. So that's one vote for stones sticking up and out. I wish the two larger stones fit that category better, they seem better for rounded mountain peaks, and I wish they were closer in size. I tried beating the big one in two but Manten is HARD STUFF! And my chipping hammer is over at the new house right now.


----------



## giraffe (Jun 26, 2009)

I like #2 best.Your big rock might not be big enough. I think 4 cuold be pretty good with a few less stones.


----------



## mistergreen (Dec 9, 2006)

+1 on #2


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

Hmm, two votes for 2, that was one of my least favorite. I should experiment with it some more. Thanks for the input :wink:



giraffe said:


> I think 4 could be pretty good with a few less stones.


 How bout this?

4b









I have to say, this one looks nicer in person and from different angles. 2 looked kind of weird from a high angle, sorta uniform. Maybe plants would bring it together.


----------



## finfan (Jun 16, 2008)

ok 4b is not working for me at all, all your other ones were better imo

imo the face of the big rock in 2 and 2b is the best, so i would keep that face and then work the rest around that, maybe if you slope the substrate on #2 even higher on the right side and have on rock on the right side pointing towards the right it might look better!?


----------



## finfan (Jun 16, 2008)

actually on second thought, 3 might actually be very nice if you just make the big rock similar to 2 and higher!


----------



## giraffe (Jun 26, 2009)

The slope on 2 might be a bit much.Maybe if you put the rocks toghether more and you would give up less plant space.


----------



## pandapr (Nov 10, 2008)

Number 3 looks great. The other ones have the rocks too high or almost hidden. From the moment I saw #3 it amazed me.


----------



## blair (Feb 8, 2009)

Okay, first things first; leave some void spaces. Iwagumi is as much an art of the arrangement of the stones as it is the spaces _between_ them. The reason #2 is not working for you is due to the fact they all point the same way. It feels unnatural to say the least, but it does have some strengths to it in the elevation, the depth, and the dynamic sensation.

#3 Doesn't show up for me so I cannot comment on that scape.

#4 Probably lacking a bit on void spaces. You need to have some free space around the stones (not just above). Without this balance it is just clutter. Even the Amano scape you reference has a bit of void due to plant growth over the scape or placement of a piece offset from the 'line' or others to imply a separation.

#4b accomplishes this better. Try pivoting the stones a bit to see some alternative faces.

It would be nice to have more height and tall stone(s) would definitely do you some justice. These pieces are small and a bit hard to work with, but relax, you have some usable stone and once the formation is set your plant types can be ironed out to play on the stones weaknesses and help turn this thing into art.

Also, don't feel like you have to use every piece. Certainly more rock helps, but as a way of selecting the pieces most suited to the arrangement. You have enough for the flexibility you desire.

Give a look at Xavier's thread on Iwagumi Design. Its a great read on the subject and may provide you with some beneficial thoughts/techniques. Regardless, at the very least it should serve to inspire you on your new objective. Try a few more based on these principles and we can work from there 

**Link to the _Iwagumi Design_ thread now included**


----------



## waterfaller1 (Jul 5, 2006)

#3 hands down! I love it.


----------



## SPECIAL||PLANS (May 27, 2009)

are you putting your aquarium light over the arrangement? it makes a big difference. to quote corb, "architecture is the masterly, correct, and magnificent play of form in light." keep that in mind.


----------



## Craigthor (Sep 9, 2007)

jaidexl said:


> I am VERY VERY frustrated at the moment!  This isn't suppose to happen, I have a new respect for a certain group of people right now.
> 
> I got this Manten stone, 10 pounds. I was not happy with what I got, the stuff is too heavy so I didn't get enough for the large tank I wanted to use it in. And I wish I could've picked them out myself, I don't like them and I don't feel like they work together.
> 
> ...


With this one what if you remove the ront right corner rock all together, switch locations of the 2 rocks in the center and point the front one towards the large stone maybe slightly move the rock to the left also. Also the hole formation is too centered and linear. rotate the whole formation about 30 degrees counter clockwise with the large stone going into the back right corner somewhat.

Also a carpet of E. Belem, Mini Microsword, or HC would be higly recommended as a full carpet as to not hide the stones appeal once planted.

Try that and post a couple fo pics and lets tweak more from there.

Craig


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

Ok, lots of good info here, thanks everyone. 

Looks like 2 and 3 are leading the race, so I'll do a few variations of those today, and try to incorporate some of your ideas. 

3 was basically me just throwing all the stones in randomly after pushing the big one down. I thought it looked really cluttered and I started working with just 3 small stones and a valley, until I realized plants will most likely kill any hardscape with just the small stones.

BLAIR - Thanks for the link.

SPECIAL||PLANS - I was working directly under a ceiling fan light hoping it would mimic a fixture well. Today it's bright in the room so I'll have to put the lamp on it.

Ok, before I wreck it, here's the last version of 4 that I ended with last night. I was really digging on it, kinda bummed no one likes it, shows what I know...

4c


----------



## Craigthor (Sep 9, 2007)

jaidexl said:


> Ok, lots of good info here, thanks everyone.
> 
> Looks like 2 and 3 are leading the race, so I'll do a few variations of those today, and try to incorporate some of your ideas.
> 
> ...


 
what does the otherside of the large stone look like? its too flat/ smooth compared to the rest of the stone in this layout.

craig


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

It's really saucer shaped, about 8" diam and 4" high, with a few flat surfaces making the most of it, and a round quarter that would make a great peak in a large tank. I tried to make it seem more oblong in the scape by showing the side of the 'saucer' pointing up. It has some awesome character but it's the overall shape that I don't like, really limits what I do in this small tank, but it might just be my stubbornness. I took a bunch of photos of it and will post them in a while. 

I tried what you and others suggested and I was really struggling to make it work, but I did stumble into a valley scape and worked it into something I'm digging now. Just have to wait for the camera battery to charge. :\


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

Somehow I lost all the pictures of the large rock. Here are todays progressions. I hope this page loads ok. :redface:

5

















6









7









8









8b









9









More angles of 9


----------



## Craigthor (Sep 9, 2007)

I really like 9. might a suggest HC would fill in nicely and stay nice and low as to compliment this scape. I would probably just use HC as anything else taller may ruin the feel this has.

Craig


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

That's what I was thinking too. Or possibly hair grass or UG in the back corners, starting just behind little chips on either side? I think the chips will have to be placed on the grown-in plants or pegged up to be significant after everything fills in. They're not dug in at all.


----------



## SearunSimpson (Jun 5, 2007)

#3 for me!


----------



## Ugly Genius (Sep 27, 2003)

You're on the right track. Today's layouts are a considerable improvement over yesterday's.

Keep playing around with the rocks. You're really close.


----------



## mott (Nov 23, 2006)

Craigthor said:


> I really like 9. might a suggest HC would fill in nicely and stay nice and low as to compliment this scape. I would probably just use HC as anything else taller may ruin the feel this has.
> 
> Craig


Agreed although I still like #3


----------



## finfan (Jun 16, 2008)

i think in today's layout #8 and #9 you got the best rockface for the big rock, i would keep that rockface for the big rock from #8 & #9 and make a few more arrangements and see where it goes, i agree that you are very close... almost there, but i would like to say that at the end of the day you have to really like whatever it is regardless of what any of us are saying and i feel like you have not reached that moment!


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

Thanks for the help, everyone!

Well, it's crunch time for moving and time to start tearing tanks down. Just got a 29 and a 110 moved over and set up, 2 down 5 to go. :icon_eek:

So, needless to say, this little thing will have to wait. I'll be back in a few days! -J


----------



## riverrat (Jul 14, 2005)

number 3


----------



## ddtran46 (Jul 8, 2008)

I like numbers 2 & 3.


----------



## SPECIAL||PLANS (May 27, 2009)

the substrate carving in #5 has an awesome sense of depth but the way the rocks facing don't really factor in. there positions are good. i took a couple of what i thought were the best aspects of the ones people liked and put them together. this may not even be feasible with the rocks you have but i feel like once the plants are incorporated it will really entertain the eye. bare in mind i did this in 5 minutes.


----------



## Francis Xavier (Oct 8, 2008)

I just got done moving myself, now i'm playing the waiting game for the tanks to arrive! Leave it to the one day i'm flying across the country for an Iwagumi thread to pop up. Anyway, enough of that, lets roll up the sleeves and get to work.

First observation - EVERY Iwagumi aquascaper on the face of the planet that at least knows the basic concept of what they're doing is almost never satisfied with their rocks. Take solace in the fact that your anguish is shared amongst the rest of us Iwagumi scapers to an almost masochistic extreme. The quest for better stones is a never ending endeavor. However, you do have a good selection to work with, so take heart.

As for the aquascape, you have good instincts, listen to them. in terms of Iwagumi design and rules #4 of the day one set was indeed your best composition, and I will explain why. 

#1 Has potential - and is probably your second best aquascape of the fold (from day 1), because it uses the texture of the rock to it's advantage to create a mountainscape (which Manten is more mountainesque than say, rugged coastline or jagged cliff). However you need to have the rocks be more present - they'd get engulfed by plants the second they were planted, so you'd need to maintain the height, and lessen the soil to emphasize the stone placement - otherwise you'd have ended up with a mound of plants and forgot that the rocks are even there.

#2 as blair pointed out is moving too much in one direction - which works sometimes, but not in this case. Here it just throws off the balance. Also, the stones are kind of used in a similar fashion to how you would use, say Shou or other slate-like stones. This causes the manten stones to be placed at weird angles that just doesn't fit right with the feel of the stones (as I mentioned earlier, they aren't so much the jagged look). Usually 'points' used in Manten stones are reserved only for the main and main support stones to create impressions in the way the rock might naturally fall. Basically, the striaght edges of your stone works against you.

#3 is too low - there is too much open space above the rocks that de-emphasize their presence in the scape (which is very important in a rock only aquascape), they're simply not set high enough (or not big enough) to make much of an impact in the long run. Also, as blair mentioned, they are crowded together too aggressively, which when I look at it, it's hard to discern which stone is the main stone (since all the stones are on an even height level just about, and blended together too well), without the prior knowledge of which stone you've been actively using as your main stone. However it is a step in the right direction.

#4 hit the whammy. #4 is a very good layout choice for the feel of manten stone, to me it looks almost instantly balanced as far as initial placement and soil work is concerned and I can instantly discern where the main stone is. The space in front of the main stone area also serves as a good focal area to emphasize a section of the carpet, and it seems like the shadows would work to your advantage when the lighting is used. However, there are a few adjustments, first you need more soil, the main hill has to be higher up to avoid the "too much" open space up top syndrome, which as previously stated would understate the impression of the stonework. It's a very common error to not have enough appropriate height in an Iwagumi layout, so don't fret it too much (in fact in some of my aquascapes i've gone the opposite way and had -too much- height in the layout). Also the stone in the left back should not be at the same height as the main stone. Think of it this way: The main stone is the alpha male lion, the main support stones are the female lions, and the small support stones are the cubs. Now, the cubs have -zero- business toying around or even pretending they're of the same calibur as the alpha male, and have to be submissive to the alpha. The female lions, act as the primary support network for the alpha by hunting and providing more cubs for the pride - ergo they've earned the right to be in the immediate presence of the alpha and at -almost- an even keel with the alpha, but still not quite, they're still lower. 

The other thing to adjust, is to try to show us other faces of the main stone, while in the same position it's in now, i'm sure that rock has a more personable side it's dying to show us and bring the scape together. Past that it would come down to basically making small adjustments in the spacing between the stones and their basic positionings and angles. But I think this one has the most hidden potential. As a side note, #9 from your recent scapes does has potential too, and I think it's your best scape from day 2, but whether to work iwth #4 or #9 is dependent on what kind of impression you want to give off - #4 is more about balance and stability, #9 is more about domination.


----------



## blair (Feb 8, 2009)

After close scrutiny I would have to agree with Francis. To put it bluntly, without a doubt the other scapes are either boring or just plain lack the quality necessary to make an iwagumi interesting and successful. The scape of #4 with an immaculate carpet in the foreground really would work well. I'll eat my words on the crowded part as I have never personally worked with Manten stone, but after looking at other examples and reevaluating this arrangement, I have to concur that you have really hit it on the nose. The distant piece in the back left and the small pieces on the right help it stay dynamic. With plant growth these will hide a bit, but I think that will truly be a great advantage. Well done!

Arrangement #9 is also excellent. It is a powerful or 'dominating' scape as previously stated as that large stone commands the others who seem to bow at its feet. With that said, compared to #4 I just don't see the same long term satisfaction. However, side-by-side with most iwagumi's out there, it far surpasses 90% of them and should not be tossed out for consideration if you are feeling that this emotion is better for you and your purpose.

If it was my tank: Number 4.


----------



## SPECIAL||PLANS (May 27, 2009)

disregard everything i said. apparently overtness and instant closure are what matter in an iwagumi tank. personally i'd want my tank to resonate as my eye constantly jumps around the composition. domination and easy answers would move the design into the mundane.


----------



## CL (Mar 13, 2008)

Scapes 2 and 3 were the best IMO. The rocks aren't too bold and they flow quite well.
9 looks great as well.


----------



## kid creole (Dec 25, 2008)

I think there are too many rocks. JMHO.


----------



## Francis Xavier (Oct 8, 2008)

SPECIAL||PLANS said:


> disregard everything i said. apparently overtness and instant closure are what matter in an iwagumi tank. personally i'd want my tank to resonate as my eye constantly jumps around the composition. domination and easy answers would move the design into the mundane.


Iwagumi is simply the idea of creating beauty out of simplicity through elegance and flow of all elements involved. One primary focal point, and 1 or 2 additional supporting focal points are fine. The next big principle is to design in such a way that certain aspects of the layout are hidden from view to give the rock a curiously mysterious feel, and have it flow in such a way that it appears the scape could very well extend far beyond the confines of the aquarium. However a disorganized mismash of rock with excess amounts of focal points only achieves tension from not knowing where to look, that is too overt.

Respectfully,
-X


----------



## malaybiswas (Nov 2, 2008)

I'll probably be the odd man out but I really liked #1. #2 & #3 were actually too overpowering for me.


----------



## SPECIAL||PLANS (May 27, 2009)

Francis Xavier said:


> Iwagumi is simply the idea of creating beauty out of simplicity through elegance and flow of all elements involved. One primary focal point, and 1 or 2 additional supporting focal points are fine. The next big principle is to design in such a way that certain aspects of the layout are hidden from view to give the rock a curiously mysterious feel, and have it flow in such a way that it appears the scape could very well extend far beyond the confines of the aquarium. However a disorganized mismash of rock with excess amounts of focal points only achieves tension from not knowing where to look, that is too overt.


i'd like to see your definition of "curiously mysterious feel" or explain how something "extends far beyond the confines of the aquarium." maybe you'd realize design is not always about being definitive, but rather its about being entertaining as the viewer discovers and makes conjectures as to what matters. the artist's design comes to life through this active engagement with the composition. your hinting at that at best with your lucid terms and lack of clarity. why don't you offer something of real substance that isnt so subjective. the solution you gave before about the lion pride was much better over this formula based method your describing now.


----------



## blair (Feb 8, 2009)

Geez... this is turning into a battlefield. Special Plans, it isn't exactly a "lucid term" by describing something that "extends far beyond the confines of an aquarium". Simply put that translates using vocabulary only a notch less complex; "your rock arrangement could provide an easy method of continuation" or "your rock arrangement could appear to be a small part of a greater whole". Stop trying to downplay people when you know well what they mean. This forum is here to provide helpful and positive collaboration, not the later.

A "curious and mysterious feel" I would agree is perhaps a bit vague, but that is the idea. If that phrase was more descriptive it would loose its mysterious intent :hihi:. Basically, when you look at the tank you should feel something powerful... the same sensation you get when viewing Stone Henge or the Grand Canyon (a synthetic and natural example provided for your benefit). Its creation, form, method of existence is dumbfounding. We have an understanding of how it came into being or reasons for its current position, but we still feel dwarfed by such a feat/scale/evolution.

I for one think his contribution was great and what he had to say will help this tank (if the aquascaper chooses to acknowledge it) on its way to fruition.

We get the fact that you are passionate about design, but ease up... no need for hostility.


----------



## Francis Xavier (Oct 8, 2008)

SPECIAL||PLANS said:


> i'd like to see your definition of "curiously mysterious feel" or explain how something "extends far beyond the confines of the aquarium." maybe you'd realize design is not always about being definitive, but rather its about being entertaining as the viewer discovers and makes conjectures as to what matters. the artist's design comes to life through this active engagement with the composition. your hinting at that at best with your lucid terms and lack of clarity. why don't you offer something of real substance that isnt so subjective. the solution you gave before about the lion pride was much better over this formula based method your describing now.


I'd be happy to elaborate more. I kept the last post short, since I don't want to be hijacking jaidexl's thread, but it at least has relevance to the main post, but I think past the next response we should engage via pm if you want to continue the conversation, unless Jaidexl states that this is an okay medium.

You make a very good point in that design isn't about being definitive - I would argue that it almost assuredly should not be past a certain point. Additionally, you're also correct in that the ultimate goal of this or any art is to create impressions or invoke emotions in the eye of the beholder - indeed Iwagumi is *Impressionistic*. Hence the relevence to emotional terms used to describe layouts or how you want to design a layout.

The most common question in regards to Iwagumi that I hear, is "what is Iwagumi" or "what makes an Iwagumi an Iwagumi." What distinguishes this art from the cleverly placed stone hardscapes prevelant in items like Malawi tanks?

Well, unfortunately (or fortunately) the distinguishing marks are a set of a few rules that at best are unclear, and oftentimes 'unspoken' rules, aside from the obvious (like putting wood in your tank instantly makes it not an Iwagumi) these aren't always easy to follow. For example, there should be only one main stone (although it is not impossible to pull off a scape with 3 main stones, but in these cases very little, if any support stones are used), and the rest of them should be in a sense, bowing to the awesome greatness that is the main stone. The main stone and main focal point acts as the conductor of the symphony - guiding how the orchestra will play and tying everything together to create harmony on what would otherwise be a random mishmash of sound.

As previously stated, Iwagumi is impressionistic - the _impression_ of the layout going beyond the boundaries of it's glass cage is of importance - by using open space and keeping rock positions "open" (that is to say they aren't all pointed inward), it creates the impression that the scape was simply cut out of a scene in nature and you're only seeing a part of it, the rest extends past the glass box. Another way of achieving this, such as in mountainscapes is by having the edges of the mountains go up to the sides of the glass, planted in such a way that contributes to this feeling. A curiously mysterious feel is just the impression that you don't get to see the entirety of the rocks presented - that there is something more to them just around the bend if you could catch a peak, this subtly invokes interest to the design. 

Iwagumi's main layout principles and simplicity and clean upkeep of plants is a direct evolution from Iwagumi as seen in Karesansui (or "Zen Rock Garden"), in which sand is used to give the impression of water, as just one example. So, I suppose you could go as far to say that by 'flow' what's really meant is to give the impression that the scape is in liquid motion figuratively and literally. The rules are important to follow - as in any art, but at the same time this doesn't prevent creative twists and turns (for example, mountainscapes can also be classified on Iwagumi if they meet fundamental rules). Iwagumi is -ALMOST- completely contradictory in it's setup, or maybe that's just because we don't fully understand this eastern art form. I realize there is more I could elaborate on, but as is this has gotten fairly long-winded.


----------



## Francis Xavier (Oct 8, 2008)

As a short addendum it warrants adding that ultimately - the design should give the impression and feeling that the creator wants it to display. This is why I worked mostly with what the author was trying to achieve with his layout as he posted. As a viewer or designer having a different favorite or the like doesn't make them any less of a credible aquascaper, Malawibiswas enjoys aquascape #1 - perhaps a reflection of his taste for a more gentle/serene approach, clwatkins enjoys #2 and #3, maybe because he enjoys dynamism. The contrast here in no way shape or form makes one right or the other wrong, and neither opinions makes them a less credible aquascaper (indeed, they're quite good at it!). 

So, essentially, I should say that when I am critiquing an aquascape, it's only the aquascape - never the designer or people who like A vs. B or C. So I apologize if it ever seemed like I was criticizing the people who like oranges instead of apples.


----------



## SPECIAL||PLANS (May 27, 2009)

my point was to try to push all this subjectivity to the next level. voting on a best scheme without clarifying the criteria is useless. even still, the vast majority of your comments are about affect or how the arrangement makes someone feel. that is all well and good, but your prescribing a result to a design yet to be determined. all that gives somebody is a recommendation as to what feeling they need to have when they observe the stones in the right position.

instead, i'm saying some kind of vocabulary has to be used to evaluate these layouts. intention, horizons, depth of field, intensity of light/shade, spatial relationship, gestalt theory, etcetera. if i come off as hostile, its my hostility for the ADA judging panels and all the gypsy rederick they use to hide the fact that they know little about actual design, sculpture, and space, when in actuality they simply have the most experience fooling around with this wonderful hobby. so my argument is, stop trying to be like those guys, following their rules; and instead, understand why they have these rules, know how to manipulate them to your own intention, and have fun with it! 46 and 2, right on through, ride the spiral to the end. let go, let go, let go!


----------



## finfan (Jun 16, 2008)

WOW... whats the saying again.....:hihi:


----------



## kid creole (Dec 25, 2008)

SPECIAL||PLANS said:


> ! 46 and 2


What does this mean?


----------



## SPECIAL||PLANS (May 27, 2009)

modern man has 44 chromosomes and 2 sex chromosomes while prehistoric man has 42 chromosomes plus 2 sex chromosomes. 46+2 is the next state of being. its from a song on tool's aenema. thought maybe someone would get it.


----------



## kid creole (Dec 25, 2008)

SPECIAL||PLANS said:


> modern man has 44 chromosomes and 2 sex chromosomes while prehistoric man has 42 chromosomes plus 2 sex chromosomes. 46+2 is the next state of being. its from a song on tool's aenema. thought maybe someone would get it.


I know the song. I didn't think it was what you were referencing. I thought if they knew anything about genetics they'd be out making the cure for cancer. And, if we're going to talk about tool music, it stops with Undertow and Opiate. Period. They should have quit while they were ahead. Go on to do other things. Disappear into the ether.

But, let's get back to planted tanks.


----------



## SPECIAL||PLANS (May 27, 2009)

we're waiting for jaidexl to finish his move and set this baby up. i for one expect his next post to more climactic than barry obama's opening pitch last night.


----------



## jaidexl (Sep 18, 2006)

Wowzers, what did I get myself into, hah! Feels like I'm back in graphic design class for constructive crit hour. :red_mouth 

Just stopping into to feed some fish and grab another tank, not much time to talk (sorry Special, pretty _anti_climactic ). FWIW, I'm digging 4 and 9 the most, nothing else was really tripping my trigger. I'm definfitely into 9 more than 4, and I have to thank everyone here for that, if I hadn't made this thread I would'a stopped at 4 and never knew that 9 was possible. Will still mess around before I decide to plant it, to see what else is hiding in there, so many possibilities just have to find them. Or... I might just leave it at 9, who knows, I've been waiting for this move for months so I can finally setup a 110gl, so that gets priority over this. 

Oh and thanks to whoever invited me to the group! TNT -J


----------



## Aglaw91 (Mar 22, 2009)

definately No. 2. Great look.


----------



## Clemsons2k (May 31, 2009)

Definitely numero 3. The second one is my least favorite I have to say.


----------

