# Sturmanskie Chronograph, Poljot 3133 Movement



## wotsch

As I've had a bit of time recently, I've done a little research on a recent acquisition - a Sturmanskie chronograph - and noted down a few details about it.

First, a couple of pictures:





































The watch has a Poljot 3133 hand-wound, 23 jewel, chronograph movement, running at 21600 bph and with a power reserve of 42 hours. I measured the accuracy over 48 hours to be a pretty linear -15s per day, which is well within specifications (see, for example, here). I've read that other forum members have much better accuracy (e.g. here), but I'm not sure that's to be expected for an old one. What are your experiences?

Here's the movement:










This movement is nearly identical to Valjoux 7734, being produced on the same machines which were sold to Poljot in 1975 - there's more details in another thread here.

The watch has a rotating bezel under the glass, controlled by the crown on the left-hand side of the body. I'm not sure whether this is intended for measuring elapsed time (like a diver's watch bezel) or for being able to quickly see the time in a different time-zone - both are possible. Any ideas which is the intended purpose?

The previous owner told me he bought the watch in 1995 from a watchmaker in Poland, who he says was a specialist in Russian Poljot watches. It spent the next 16 years in his cupboard and was never worn and seldom wound. I have no idea if he bought the watch new or used, so if an expert can give me an idea of when the watch could have been produced, then I'd be very grateful.

I obtained the watch on a slightly rough Vostock leather strap, which I really like as it gives the watch a more authentic 70s/80s feel to it.










The only anomaly I can see on the watch (but I'm no expert) is that the second-hand (which is always black in photos I've seen of this type of watch) seems to have been replaced by a red minute-counter hand.

I am really enjoying this watch and it's getting plenty of time on my wrist.

Hope you like it.

-wotsch


----------



## Dick Browne

Lovely looking watch - I've got a few Russian watches with that same movement and it's a real worker. The accuracy you're seeing is pretty much in line with what I see from my Poljot Chrono, which is the only one I've bothered checking for accuracy.

Oddly enough, I saw yours, thought "Nice watch, I wonder..." and fired up eBay (come on, don't tell me you don't do that!) and the first one I saw had a red second hand, not with a cross piece like yours, but red all the same. I prefer yours to the eBay one, btw, I'm still searching for the right Omega Flightmaster, so I like that style of hand anyway 

Cheers

Richard


----------



## wotsch

Hi Richard,

thanks for the feedback, it's good to hear that the accuracy is OK.

re. the second hand. I actually meant the small second hand at 9 o'clock, should have been more clear ;-) As far as I have seen, the big timer second hand is always red.

BTW, I do that eBay thing too


----------



## martinzx

Lovely watch in excellent condition, you are correct the left sub dial second counter are normally in black, the Chrono counter with the cross on the end indicates its a re-issue from 1995, maybe sold under vostok hence the strap, but orginally by the 1stMoscow Watch factory Poljot.

You can look your watch up here & maybe find more info on Mark Godon's excellent site

http://ussrtime.com/start.html

Thanks for posting :thumbsup:


----------



## Chascomm

wotsch said:


> The previous owner told me he bought the watch in 1995 from a watchmaker in Poland, who he says was a specialist in Russian Poljot watches. It spent the next 16 years in his cupboard and was never worn and seldom wound. I have no idea if he bought the watch new or used, so if an expert can give me an idea of when the watch could have been produced, then I'd be very grateful.


This dial, with no country-of-origin indicated, in combination with the old Shturmanskie chrono case with 2-piece back, bears out the previous owner's story. This watch would have been made in the earliest post-Soviet period in the first half of the 1990s. If I recall correctly, the snap-on caseback was becoming common for other models of Poljot chrono by 1995.



> The watch has a rotating bezel under the glass, controlled by the crown on the left-hand side of the body. I'm not sure whether this is intended for measuring elapsed time (like a diver's watch bezel) or for being able to quickly see the time in a different time-zone - both are possible. Any ideas which is the intended purpose?


As you say, both uses are possible, and I've used this bezel type both ways on occasion. Given that half-hour marks are present, I would say that the designers considered the possibility of its use as an hour accumulator in combination with the 30 minute chronograph mechanism. By contrast, the later Shturmanskie-II chrono case (internal bezel with crown at 10 o'clock) has the bezel marked with hour numbers only.


----------



## chris l

The second hand is the same as that used on the later Okeahs.

I like the 3133, and have a couple of old Sturmanskies; one issue and one commemorative navy piece.

Very nice watch!


----------



## mel

Nice piece, very OKEAH -ish, or maybe 'tother way round, maybe the OKEAH's are STURMANSKI-ish.

The grey dial is very appealing, there are not that many watches in that colourway! E N J O Y! :yes:


----------



## danyel

Une autre poljot calibre Molnija 3105



sturmanskie 3133


----------



## danyel

sturmanskie 3133


----------



## wotsch

@danyel: lovely! Especially the one with the red star.

This one:



danyel said:


> sturmanskie 3133


is on my wish-list right up near the top, preferably with a cyrillic dial like the one shown here.

Cheers!


----------



## danyel




----------



## martinzx

danyel said:


> sturmanskie 3133
> 
> [IMG alt="i7xu09j3l5r6k8hkyh-n871h2...k8hkyh-n871h2jsiqhemh3ft4-img_03041.jpg[/IMG]


First time i think I have seen this one, it looks great :thumbsup:


----------



## tonyrsv

Well, just started to look at the possible purchase of my first rusky and there are a few nice chronos here.

Particuarly like the one with the cyrillic dial in the link posted above.

Thanks all for the pics.



> Oddly enough, I saw yours, thought "Nice watch, I wonder..." and fired up eBay (come on, don't tell me you don't do that!)


 - Count me in too :rofl2:


----------



## Dick Browne

tonyrsv said:


> Well, just started to look at the possible purchase of my first rusky and there are a few nice chronos here.
> 
> Particuarly like the one with the cyrillic dial in the link posted above.
> 
> Thanks all for the pics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oddly enough, I saw yours, thought "Nice watch, I wonder..." and fired up eBay (come on, don't tell me you don't do that!)
> 
> 
> 
> - Count me in too :rofl2:
Click to expand...


----------



## wotsch

Just acquired another Sturmanskie to keep the other one company. Here's a first photo taken with my phone:



Sturmanski by wotsch, on Flickr

I'll take some better ones when the light is better and I have a bit of spare time.

This dial is a dark blue and the watch came with a Poljot steel armband that's a little lightweigt, but in perfect condition. Otherwise, it has the same case and case back, same movement, same rotating bezel under the glass, same pushers etc.

-wotsch


----------



## louiswu

Hi guys,

Some very very nice Sturmanskies on display here. Thanks for sharing them with us.

However as well as the pleasure i got from seeing them, i got an itch to own one

(that happens a lot with stuff i see around here)

So it took no time at all to decide to pull the trigger when one came up in the SC.

This beauty arrived in less than a week from our friend in Macedonia, much to my delight.










It's an 80's re-issue for the export market presumably. It has a little wabi, but that's just the way i like 'em.

It came on a Timefactors rally which is really comfy and suits the watch very well imo.










It's a lovely watch which my rubbish pics do no justice too.

I'm an awful photographer at the best of times, and the domed acrylic and reflective dial make this all the more difficult.

I shall head over to the photography tips section asap.

Anyways .. the Russian collection grows. Many thanks to Martin for the sale and the speedy delivery.

Now i just need an Okeah to go with it.......

... and a Buran

.. and ..

Does it ever end ?

cheers

Nick


----------



## Kutusov

louiswu said:


> Now i just need an Okeah to go with it.......
> 
> ... and a Buran
> 
> .. and ..
> 
> Does it ever end ?
> 
> cheers
> 
> Nick


I missed this whole topic, somehow didn't get the notification! Some great watches here! ...and Nick: 1)you do need an Okeah; 2) No, it never ends  Feeling the need for a Buran myself right now 

I have a few questions regarding your (Nick's and Ex-Martin's) Poljot though. You call it an early 80s reissue. Has their production been stopped until then? I would say that's an original Poljot: it's still a CCCP one and has the original case unlike the 2004 reissues (what I'm used to call a reissue). The difference in cases can be seen here from my recent work on my Okeah 2004 reissue.










On the bottom there's an original Okeah/Sturmanskie case (kindly donated by Draygo) and the one on the top is the 2004 version. Note how there isn't a raised glass because the case is taller and the sides envelop the crystal.

Also, I know you said you like your wabi but it might be worth doing two easy things. First, trying to clean that residual glue on the 5 o'clock baton. Second, trying to get an original second hand for the subdial at 9. I don't know how easy it is to come across one but maybe it could be salvaged from a wrecked evilbay one?


----------



## martinzx

Fair point Kutusov , sounds better mate

Enjoy Nick, looks great, love the wrist shot,

wear it in good health

Martin :thumbsup:


----------



## louiswu

Cheers fellas.

I am liking the Poljot very much - it's barely been off my wrist since it got here, despite the other arrivals it's had to contend with.

And... and here's the massive shock... my Mrs actually likes it very much too.

'Shabby chic' she calls it. I think i'll have to keep my eyes open for something similar-ish for her birthday.

If i remember. which is unlikely.

My apologies for constant referal to this model a re-issue. I think i misunderstood something i read.

Sturmanskies were only available to the public afer 1983, right? but had been in production for official use since sometime in the 70's ?


----------



## louiswu

Kutusov said:


> Also, I know you said you like your wabi but it might be worth doing two easy things. First, trying to clean that residual glue on the 5 o'clock baton. Second, trying to get an original second hand for the subdial at 9. I don't know how easy it is to come across one but maybe it could be salvaged from a wrecked evilbay one?


Agree about the excess glue. It's no massive problem - i barely notice it unless the light hits it just right(wrong).

I was concerned that i'd need a solvent to shift the glue, which may spoil the dial ?

Then there's the distinct possiblity of me destroying something when trying to get to the dial. I've only had occasional success at that kind of thing. :hammer:

I have no problem waiting til it next needs a service and letting a professional sort it out.

but - what's the problem with the minute recorder hand?

I'm pretty sure it should be black ?? but i have been wrong soooo many times it's not funny ! Or is it something else?

I'll certainly keep an eye open for a scrapper\donor. Always best to have spares if poss.


----------



## Draygo

...minute recorder hand looks ok to me, ie. It's the same as on mine, isn't it? Or is it missing the 'barb'? Can be sure.










One question to all: my glass isn't domed, it's tall, straight sided. Is this not normal/original?


----------



## Kutusov

Draygo said:


> ...minute recorder hand looks ok to me, ie. It's the same as on mine, isn't it? Or is it missing the 'barb'? Can be sure.
> 
> One question to all: my glass isn't domed, it's tall, straight sided. Is this not normal/original?


You and louiswu are both right, never noticed that myself but the Sturmanskie (and the original Okeah) do have different subdial hands... the one at 9 isn't barbed. So forget what I said. :blush2:

Regarding the glass, I have the notion that the initially navy and airforce issued had a straight mineral glass. Many of the civilian versions have it too but it's one of those things with Russian watches... this one might very well been produced with an acrylic crystal...


----------



## louiswu

louiswu said:


> but - what's the problem with the minute recorder hand?
> 
> I'm pretty sure it should be black ?? but i have been wrong soooo many times it's not funny ! Or is it something else?


See what i mean. I of course meant the second hand. The one on the left. At 9 o'clock. The black one.

My apologies again.

Very nice example you have there Draygo. Love the cyrillic logo.

I'd say the tall, flat-sided crystal is possibly aftermarket.

I have a vintage Seiko with a crystal like that and it's defo aftermarket ..but i like it more than the domed.

Is your glass or acrylic?


----------



## Draygo

louiswu said:


> I'd say the tall, flat-sided crystal is possibly aftermarket.
> 
> I have a vintage Seiko with a crystal like that and it's defo aftermarket ..but i like it more than the domed.
> 
> Is your glass or acrylic?


Acrylic. But I do like the tall straight sides... Then again, domed glass would be nice


----------



## louiswu

Of course none of the pics on Mark Gordon's site show profile view, so i dunno about the originality of the flat crystals.

I bow to Kutusov's superior knowlodge on this. Looking at the condition of the rest of your (Draygo's) Sturmanskie i would not be surprised to learn the acrylic was original.

I just spent some time perusing Sturmanksies on ussrtime. He refers to the 80's civilian versons as being 're-issues' of 70's military chronographs. There is a slight difference in the chrono mechanism apparantly. Though nothing as exciting as the hacking mod of the 31659


----------



## wotsch

louiswu said:


> I'd say the tall, flat-sided crystal is possibly aftermarket.
> 
> I have a vintage Seiko with a crystal like that and it's defo aftermarket ..but i like it more than the domed.
> 
> Is your glass or acrylic?


Both of my Sturmanskie's have tall, flat-sided crystal. Looking through this collection, that seems to have been quite common - e.g. here, here and here (the whole site is great, by the way).

-wotsch


----------



## Kutusov

louiswu said:


> I bow to Kutusov's superior knowlodge on this.


Errrmmm.... I wouldn't do that if I were you... 

Regarding the modifications on the 3133 of the 80s, I would to know what those are. I read something about that somewhere I can't remember sometime maybe last year :sweatdrop: The only thing I recall is the later versions had parts in golden tons (wheels and stuff - see my superior knowledge?) which meant they were made from a different alloy more tolerant to temperatures changes and so with less variations in accuracy dependent on how hot or cold it is.


----------



## William_Wilson

As I recall from my limited research, the military ones had military issue marks on the movement. At the beginning of 80's the 3133's were improved and the two piece reset lever was converted to a one piece lever, because of the movement's better performance.

Later,

William


----------



## Kutusov

William_Wilson said:


> As I recall from my limited research, the military ones had military issue marks on the movement. At the beginning of 80's the 3133's were improved and the two piece reset lever was converted to a one piece lever, because of the movement's better performance.
> 
> Later,
> 
> William


Oh, let me add the elementary thing... the Air Force Sturmanskie didn't had the crown at 9 and the movement was a 31659. Same thing as a 3133 but it hacks. AFAIK is just like a 3133 but when you pull the crown there's a little plate that comes in contact with the main spring (?) stopping the movement. It's a "forced" hack for that matter.


----------



## louiswu

Kutusov, check out catalog number 0184 on ussrtime. That's the Sturmanskie version I'm referring to.

It's listed as an original 70's military-issue with a 2 piece chrono reset lever.

Catalog number 0594 is the 80's 're-issue' with the 1-piece reset lever.

There are later military issued versions with the 1-piece lever, and they have a date stamp on the movement. (catalog no 1271)

It would appear that the 70s mil-issued watches did not have the date stamp, presumably because there were no civilian versions to distinguish them from.

Oh, and take a look at 0184 for the original Okeah and 0595 for the re-issue.

They are luuuurvely ! :drool: I want !!!


----------



## Kutusov

Well, I have this one and I' happy with it:










...but this one I would like to have :man_in_love: :


----------



## mhocking

Kutusov said:


> Well, I have this one and I' happy with it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...but this one I would like to have :man_in_love: :


Oh I do like all 3 of those. Where did you source the Okeah from????

Mark


----------



## Kutusov

mhocking said:


> Oh I do like all 3 of those. Where did you source the Okeah from????
> 
> Mark


What 3? You mean 2?

My Okeah came from Canada but it got caught by customs so in the end it was pretty much the price of a new one. There are still several of these around, brand new (these are the 2004 reissues I was talking about before.) I'll PM you a few linkies...


----------



## pg tips

One with a bit of wabi :yes:


----------



## wotsch

I would like to thank everyone on this forum and uhrforum.de for the feedback to my Sturmanskie. Some very interesting information has been shared on both forums. I would like to pull it together and summarise for everyone (additional to the information in the original post).

As I wrote above, my Sturmanskie was purchased by the previous owner in 1995. A very detailed dating came from Poljotnik at uhrforum.de, based on the numbering and other symbols on the movement. To paraphrase Poljotnik: Soviet 3133s have 'SU' before the movement number (3133). Movements after 1995/96 have a 'P' before the 3133, except some recent Maktaim movements. Post-Soviet movements made before 1995/96 have neither 'SU' nor 'P' before the movement number and have the 1st MWF trademark stamp under the balance wheel - which is missing on the later Maktaim movements. In the first few post-Soviet years, left-over Soviet movements (SU 3133) and parts were used, which suggests my watch does not date from the first couple of post-Soviet years and therefore from 1994/95 (neither 'SU' nor 'P', but with the 1st MWF logo under the balance wheel). This corresponds martinzx's opinion: "the Chrono counter with the cross on the end" means the watch must be a 90s re-issue and with Chascomm's observation that the dial, "with no country-of-origin indicated, in combination with the old Shturmanskie chrono case with 2-piece back, bears out the previous owner's story. This watch would have been made in the earliest post-Soviet period in the first half of the 1990s."

That all points to a pretty certain date of manufacture in 1994/95.

JoeMeurer at uhrforum.de gave some very interesting information about Sturmanksi variants. Here is the translation:

"There are two versions: the 'big' Sturmanskie (3133 movement) with a second crown for setting the adjustable time-zone ring and the 'small' Sturmanskie with no time-zone ring but with the 31659 movement with hacking second. The 31659 movement is relatively uncommon. It was not sold to civilians, but was reserved for the military. Both movements were derived from the Swiss Valjoux 7733 (with smaller balance wheel and higher frequency - 21,600 bph instead of 18,000 bph) [...]. The 7733 was licensed to the USSR at the beginning of the 70s. The USSR also purchased all necessary tools, equipment and training along with a basic chronograph base with dial, hands and cases. The first russian chronograph - the OKEAH - was produced from this basis and supplied only to the military. Later, hundreds of civilian versions were produced and available to the general public. Until the fall of the Soviet Union, the name "Sturmanskie" was reserved by the military. Afterwards, it was used in bulk."

Hope you find that interesting.

-wotsch


----------



## Kutusov

wotsch said:


> Hope you find that interesting.
> 
> -wotsch


I did, thanks for that. A lot of things there I didn't knew about. So thank you for compiling all that info and for going into the trouble of posting all that! :thumbsup:


----------



## wotsch

Kutusov said:


> So thank you for compiling all that info and for going into the trouble of posting all that! :thumbsup:


A pleasure. I figure the best way to remember facts like that is to type it up or write it down. Then after it's typed up, posting it here is just a small step.


----------



## Fantome

If I may add a few comments:

The 3133 chronograph was introduced in 1976 in the Poljot "Ocean" and was strictly for Soviet Navy use. The telemeter register was calibrated in nautical miles.

The Soviet Air Force also received a new chronograph based on the 3133, the silver dialed "Navigator", seen below:










These were fitted in an all stainless-steel case (crowns, pushers and case back), and featured a settable GMT ring for tracking two time zones. Early calibre 3133 movements can be identified by the steel chronograph gears, and adjustable flyback lever. As these movements were strictly for internal use, no "SU" export stamp existed on the chrono bridge during this period.










In the 1980's the Navigator was updated to a "colour" configuration, with the main dial scheme being gray. The GMT function was removed and the inner bezel was now fixed. The case, crown and pushers also remained stainless steel, but without the GMT crown.










The movement was also updated with a hacking lever, brass chrono gears instead of steel, a self-leveling flyback lever, and designated as the calibre 31659.










The movement also "hacked" by means of a lever with a small jumper at the end (circled below) that engaged the balance wheel, and was activated by pulling out the crown/winding stem into the set position:










The calibre 3133 did not have any markings that would identify it as military, although some calibre 31659 movements had production dates stamped on the balance bridge, (which typically ranged from 1987-1989) in the quarter-year format, e.g. 1-87 for first quarter, 1987.

Neither the Ocean nor the Navigator had any country of origin designation on the dials.










Both the Ocean and Navigator were military only, however, in the 1980's, Poljot opened up the use of the calibre 3133 to commercial enterprise and export. Thus any 3133 with the "SU" stamp on the chrono bridge was made from this period until the collapse of the Soviet Union.

It was also during this time that Poljot manufactured a commercial version of the gray-dialed Navigator. This version was equipped with a settable GMT inner bezel, chrome-plated brass case (likewise crowns and pushers), with only the two-piece case back assembly remaining stainless steel. Early versions used the same handset as the military-only calibre 31659 Navigator, but later versions were fitted with "blunted" hour and minute hands.

In the 1990's, a commercial version of the calibre 31659 Navigator found its way to market. It too was equipped with a chrome-plated brass case and blunted hour/minute hands, but had the familiar fixed inner bezel configuration as its military cousin.

Finally, the 90's brought in another change to the calibre 3133 and derived movements that makes dating them a bit easier; the mono-metallic yellow balance wheel was replaced with a bi-metallic white balance wheel, which offered better thermal compensation.


----------



## louiswu

Some superb info here. Big thanks to all who contributed. :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## wotsch

I wholeheartedly agree with louiswu, there have been some really interesting posts in this thread and I've learned a lot about my first Sturmanskie. Thanks to everyone who posted so far.

As I mentioned above, I obtained a second Sturmanskie recently. I had a chance to take some decent photos this afternoon.

Here's the dial:



Sturmanskie2-01small by wotsch, on Flickr



Sturmanskie2-02small by wotsch, on Flickr

The insignia is different from the one on my other Sturmanskie, looks more like a falling bomb. Does that signify that the watch was for bomber crews (or in honour of the bomber crews)?

Here's the movement:



Sturmanskie2-06small by wotsch, on Flickr

...just noticed the green fluff! Don't know where that came from !?!

If I rightly understood the information from Poljotnik on uhrforum.de and from Fantome above, the 'SU' stamp and the white balance wheel date this one to the very early 90s.

Here are a few more photos:



Sturmanskie2-03small by wotsch, on Flickr



Sturmanskie2-04small by wotsch, on Flickr



Sturmanskie2-05small by wotsch, on Flickr

Don't forget to put the clocks forward tonight!

-wotsch


----------



## Fantome

wotsch said:


> I wholeheartedly agree with louiswu, there have been some really interesting posts in this thread and I've learned a lot about my first Sturmanskie. Thanks to everyone who posted so far.
> 
> As I mentioned above, I obtained a second Sturmanskie recently. I had a chance to take some decent photos this afternoon.
> 
> Here's the dial:


Yes, this would have been made prior to Poljot handing over production to Volmax, which was already forming - although not a legal entity by this time. The SU stamp may indicate pre-1992 production, however, that is no guarantee. Post-1992 production may have included movements and movement parts manufactured prior to the end of the Soviet Union. In any case, you can be fairly confident that your new watch was produced in the early 1990's, and is most likely '91-'93.



> The insignia is different from the one on my other Sturmanskie, looks more like a falling bomb. Does that signify that the watch was for bomber crews (or in honour of the bomber crews)?


This insignia was used for the original Navigator, which started production in 1949:


----------



## Faijex

Kutusov said:


> ...but this one I would like to have :man_in_love: :


Hard to find? or expensive?...either way that looks sweet


----------



## Kutusov

Faijex said:


> Hard to find? or expensive?...either way that looks sweet


I never saw another one like this, so I have no idea if that's expensive or not... and maybe it's an aftermarket paint-job but I have no information whatsoever about this one :dntknw:


----------



## Kutusov

wotsch said:


> The insignia is different from the one on my other Sturmanskie, looks more like a falling bomb. Does that signify that the watch was for bomber crews (or in honour of the bomber crews)?


Yeap, your're probably right. I've seen it mentioned as a logo for fighter-bombers squadrons but I could never get any information confirming this. Anyway, it's a bomb with wings so we're probably not far from the truth


----------



## Kutusov

Ok, so I had it with you lot and all your Air Force Sturmanskies... so this is a incoming :tongue2:










2004 civil reissue. :yes2:

Not sure if I like that strap bigger than the case, a lot of people use them that way but I think it might mask away a bit the shape of the case. So probably I'll be needing a new strap for this one.


----------



## William_Wilson

Kutusov said:


> Ok, so I had it with you lot and all your Air Force Sturmanskies... so this is a incoming :tongue2:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2004 civil reissue. :yes2:
> 
> Not sure if I like that strap bigger than the case, a lot of people use them that way but I think it might mask away a bit the shape of the case. So probably I'll be needing a new strap for this one.


Yes, that does not look right with that case. The ÐŸÐ¸Ð»Ð¾Ñ‚ and ÐœÐ°ÐºÑ‚Ð°Ð¹Ð¼ style cases seem to go better with those straps.



















Later,

William


----------



## Kutusov

William_Wilson said:


> Yes, that does not look right with that case. The ÐŸÐ¸Ð»Ð¾Ñ‚ and ÐœÐ°ÐºÑ‚Ð°Ð¹Ð¼ style cases seem to go better with those straps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Later,
> 
> William


My Okeah came with an horrible BLUE strap jut like so I already know it's a no-no









BTW, stop showing me those Marktimes or I'll have to buy one!!!


----------

