5Alive replied to ty2airborn's topic in 2000-2006 & 2007-2014 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 2500HD/3500HDOne thing to do to eliminate all of the courtesy lights, retained accessory power, door/key chimes, and other body control module awakenings is to pop your hood release, shut all your doors, and walk away from the truck for at least 30 minutes. But before you walk away, go ahead and set up your (fused) multimeter in series with your battery under the hood, that way when you do return to the truck to conduct your parasitic draw tests, you are not dealing with temporary loads from having shut down all your modules (by disconnecting power) and reawakening all your modules (by hooking up your meter). Glove box shut if you have a glove box light? Doors shut? Meter all set up? Under hood light bulb pulled if you have one? OK, partially close your hood and walk away. Come back to the truck say an hour later, do NOT open any doors, lift your hood, and begin your parasitic draw observations and fuse pulling tests, one at a time, of the underhood fuses only on the first go around. Might as well start with your most culpable suspects that you found with previous testing. 3.2 amps is quite a bit of current, so we really want to rule out doors being open, modules going through a change of power state or boot up sequence, etc. After the more refined results of that test, then your attention can be turned to the middle and left bussed electrical centers. (MBEC and LBEC)
5Alive replied to John_McFly's topic in 2000-2006 & 2007-2014 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 2500HD/3500HDJohn_McFLy... outstanding can do perseverance diagnosis, and repair. Likely more methodical and procedurally correct than what one might hazard at a GM dealer. Thank you for posting the nitty gritty details. Subscribed for future reference.
Thank you Bill, for your detailed post on step by step diagnostics. And thank you John288, for returning to report what your resolution ended up being. Here the dealer sold you the wrong relay that they wouldn't take back. The American automotive business seems to be built on the rape of consumers... from manufacturing to selling to service. I have a Japanese car with over 350,000 miles and 25 years of service, never garaged, and never had a problem with the door lock relays or actuators.
5Alive replied to pavwa's topic in 2000-2006 & 2007-2014 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 2500HD/3500HDI experienced the same failure modality. The discovery that the rear doors won't work. Then, a couple years later, they magically work again. Then, for no apparent reason, they fail again.
5Alive replied to Quadra's topic in 1982-2005 Chevrolet S-10/Blazer & GMC S15/Sonoma/JimmySo many reports of the same problem, but never any solutions. Just question marks! Bringing this up to the top, hoping the OP will come back and say what was done to fix it, if anything.
5Alive replied to Big James's topic in 1999-2006 & 2007-2013 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 1500Same problem, but on a 2005. Not sure where to begin to try and fix it.
5Alive replied to dewfpo's topic in 2000-2006 & 2007-2014 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 2500HD/3500HDI don't blame you DEWFPO. This isn't a 2500 issue. It is a GM truck issue, and a very common problem. There might be someone in the 1500 forum who has solved it, and would never venture into the 2500 forum. I wish I had a solution for you, but all I have to offer is concurrence that my rear GM truck doors have the same problem.
5Alive replied to Towandrace25's topic in 2000-2006 & 2007-2014 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 2500HD/3500HDI've seen this problem before online and in real life too. It usually happens to people who: 1. assume their loaded trailer weight, without ever actually weighing their trailer as loaded. 2. assume their tongue weight, without ever actually measuring their tongue weight with a tongue weight scale. 3. assume the tow ratings of their vehicle, without ever actually looking up their tow ratings from the vehicle manufacture. 4. assume the maximum tow ratings printed on their hitch apply to all loads, while ignoring the other information on the label. 5. ignore the weight carrying rating on their hitch 6. ignore the weight distribution requirement to achieve the maximum rating on their hitch. From reading your post, it sounds like you did all six of the things that people who end up with hitch and frame fatigue typically do. 1. "I am towing a 24' aluminum trailer w/ race car and everything that goes with it. Likely around 6000# loaded up,, A typical 24' Featherlite Aluminum trailer weighs 3,700 lbs empty, without any cabinets or accessories. If your car weighs 3,000 lbs, and your tools, box, winch, tires, tire jack, tire rack, spare engine, racing gear, fluids, and fuel weigh 1,300 lbs altogether., then you'd be 33% heavier than you thought you were. The point is, there is no point in guessing. But there is great merit in going to a 3 platform Cat scale and learning what your real loaded trailer weight is, so you can plan accordingly. 2. 'I am WELL under the capacities of this truck." A typical race car trailer has much of it's weight forward of the trailer axles, due to the race car being front engine, rear drive, loaded in nose first, with the aft end of the trailer kept clear in order to back the car out again. Other than tire racks mounted on the wall at the aft end of the trailer to try and ballast back the forward biased weight, everything needed to race is upfront. The tools, the spare engine, the jack, the oil, the fuel, the cabinets, etc. You assume that you are "well under the capacities of this truck" that you have... but based on my current ownership and use of 3 similar trailers (a 24', a 20', and a 16'), and based on looking at your photo, I'm going to assume that your tongue weight is over two times the tongue weight carrying capacity of your hitch. 200% overloaded. Without exaggeration. There is only one way to find out which assumption is closer to the truth: weigh your tongue weight. Use a multiplatform commercial scale, or a tongue weight scale. I use and like Sherline tongue weight scales. 3. "not anywhere near capacity of 10K and tongue weight max of 1K per the hitch specs" The 2013 Chevrolet Trailering Guide lists the maximum rated towing capacities for the 2013 2500 3/4 ton Suburban 4x4 as 9,400 lbs., not 10K lbs. Two wheel drives are 9,600 lbs. Both the 9,400 and 9.600 lb ratings are raw maximums, GM states the weight of any cargo or extra passengers in the Suburban must be subtracted from these maximums to determine actual towing capacity. Since the vehicle does the towing, not the hitch by itself in a vacuum, the ratings of the vehicle need to be considered. A case in point is that the failure shown in the photo is of the vehicle frame, not the hitch, Here's a link to the official 2013 GM Trailering Guide. See page 13 for Suburbans. http://www.chevrolet.com/content/dam/Chevrolet/northamerica/usa/nscwebsite/en/Home/Vehicles/Trucks%20and%20Vans/2013%20Silverado%203500HD/Model%20Overview/02_pdfs/Trailering%20Guide%20MY13%20eBrochure.pdf 4. "not anywhere near capacity of 10K and tongue weight max of 1K per the hitch specs" If and when you read page 13 of Chevrolet's Trailering Guide for 2013, you will discover that not only is your vehicle not rated to tow 10K lbs. but your hitch isn't rated to carry a 10K trailer or 1K of tongue weight either. It sounds like only part of the hitch label was taken into consideration, when really all the ratings on the hitch label need to be considered. Points 5 & 6 explore the rest of the text on the hitch label, and are copied below verbatim from Page 13 of the trailering guide, (but also stated on the hitch label) 5. When using a weight carrying hitch, the maximum trailer weight is 5,000 lbs, with a 600 lb. trailer tongue weight limit. 6. A weight distributing hitch and sway control are required for trailer weights greater than 5,000 lbs. "I am beyond pissed off at this point.... no reason this should be happening." "Suggestions? WD hitch could help?" You've already suggested a good solution to your quest for suggestions. Yes, a WD hitch would help. In fact, GM states that a WD hitch is required for your trailer weight, even at your low estimate of 6,000 lbs. The fact that you are asking about a WD hitch implies that you are not using one now... which offers ample "reason for this to be happening". It looks to me like you are weight carrying about 1,200 lbs of tongue weight on a hitch that is only rated for 600 lbs of tongue weight absent any sort of weight distribution. It sounds like you have been well OVER the ratings, and need to get an actual factual weight of your loaded trailer and tongue weight, and also get a WD hitch system before your next tow.
5Alive replied to weasel897's topic in 1999-2006 & 2007-2013 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 1500Ok, that is an important confirmation, as it means there is an amp module underneath your center console that does power on with door opening for chimes, and does remain on with Retained Accessory Power, but is NOT a Class 2 data controlled amp. As mentioned earlier, high on the list of suspects are that amp, and/or the wiring to/from that amp, and the radio head unit, and/or the wiring to/from the radio head unit. At least with your confirmation of UQ7, you now know that you have an amp and what kind it is... because you wouldn't want to pull your center console apart to find nothing down there! Good luck with your continued diagnosis..
5Alive replied to marcs28's topic in 1999-2006 & 2007-2013 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 1500Marcos28... you are on the right path with the parts explosion diagram. It may also help you to have a wiring diagram as well. I don't know about the GMT900 series, but in the GMT800 series, GM offered many different wiring configurations for dual batteries, denoted by RPO codes. Code TP2 was already mentioned above. In the GMT800, the TP2 wiring configuration was generally for trailering (not Law Enforcement), in that it provided a 40 amp rated circuit to the rear trailering harness, separating that duty from the vehicle's main battery. If you choose this wiring method on a GMT800, don't forget to pull the 40 amp fuse from the main panel, and move the appropriate wire off of "Stud 1", so that the starting battery is fully divorced from the trailering power circuit. I can only imagine that the GMT900 is arranged somewhat similarly, but naturally different in the specifics. Some of the other Dual Battery wiring configurations were represented by RPO codes such as 8Y9, 7Y9, 8B0, TQ3, TUV... perhaps a couple of others... some of which were for the Tahoe Police, such as 8Y9 or 8B0 (two different wiring strategies), others which for paralleled installations on diesels, such as TQ3 and TUV. Years ago I posted more details on the connection and operation differences that distinguish these GM dual battery wiring RPOs, but because GM-Trucks unfortunately only permits searching for just the previous year, and I made my dual battery wiring posts at least half a dozen years ago, those posts are lost I guess. (As an aside, the 1 year search limitation of GM-Trucks is a pity. The current and new members cannot easily access the older posts made back when these vehicles were new and the information was more accessible from the dealerships and fresher in the minds of highly interested and motivated owners seeking it out. Now, those original owners have since sold their vehicles to second and third owners, who are in more need of repair and maintenance information than the original owners. But on this website, the older original posts are inaccessible using a search, which could lead to the blind leading the blind.) Back to dual batteries.... on your parts explosion diagram, an isolation relay is indicated... GM Part # 12135194. Before you order this relay, look at your firewall. Do you actually have the threaded studs pre-welded to your firewall to mount that relay? I didn't. I had to add the threaded studs, because I was unwilling to drill blind fastener holes through the firewall, not knowing what was directly behind. There may be other unused threaded studs on the firewall of your GMT900, but will they line up with the holes of the GM relay? Mine didn't. I had to add a plate to the firewall that matched the existing unused studs on the firewall, and onto that plate I pre-fitted studs that matched the relay mounting hole pattern. Again, I was working with a GMT800, but I would suggest that anyone look out for these types of issues prior to ordering parts, because the parts you end up actually needing could be effected by the details. In the instance of this relay, it may help to know that the GM relay is manufactured by White Rodgers. It is a "Type 120" 12VDC normally open single pole solenoid (SPNO) that has a continuous duty rating of 100 amps and an inrush current rating of 400 amps, with a die-electric strength of 500 volts. It has silver alloy contacts, with 6 ohms intermittent resistance and 16 ohms continuous resistance. I say all this to say that you can get this solenoid directly from a White Rodgers distributor, and still have all the GM OEM electrical engineering validation that you are seeking by doing a factory wiring installation... with the added advantage of lower cost, and, more mounting options and trigger terminal configuration options, since White Rodgers constructs the same solenoid with different base plates and coil grounding methods. Factors like whether or not you have insulation on your firewall where the relay would need to mount, or whether or not you have a wiring harness with a connector already there to use, and other practical limitations presented by your vehicle not being originally built with dual batteries, might influence your decision to order this solenoid from GM, or check out the various configurations of the same relay directly through White Rodgers. Take the trigger terminals as an example. In the GMT800, there was a "lonely connector" dangling unused along the firewall, exactly where the GM dual battery solenoid was design to mount. There was even a picture online called "lonely connector" posted by a GMT800 owner many years ago who wanted to know what it was for. This connector is a two wire Metri Pack Sealed 150 Series connector, and is identified by GM as part number 12052641 for use with dual battery RPO code TP2. It carries ignition 3 voltage and ground. It is the trigger circuit to latch the solenoid in Run. Do you have this lonely connector dangling from a harness on your firewall? You had better, because the GM configuration of the White Rodgers relay, part number 12135194, is going to need that connector to hook up to it. If you don't have that connector currently dangling from your harness, and you've already ordered the GM version of the relay, then you can easily get a pigtail service harness with the connector and two blunt cut splice leads by ordering ACDelco part number PT374. This is a common connector, used not only for a "Battery Isolation Switch" but also as a GM "Boost Solenoid Connector" (part number 12102747). Same thing. OR, you can order a White Rodgers solenoid that has open stud screw terminals, and use eyelets on your trigger wires. Why would you need to add trigger wires? Because even if you have the "lonely connector", the wires from that connector may not be "connected" all the way through to where they need to go. Mine weren't. The wires on my lonely connector went from the firewall to connector C100 under the UnderHood Body Electrical Center. That's where they stopped. But per the wiring diagram, the Ignition 3 circuit needed to extend through the firewall to the MidBody Electrical Center underneath the dash in order for the circuit to be complete. This is why I suggest to you that the parts explosion diagram may not be enough, you also might need the circuit wiring diagram, depending on how your truck is configured. I had to complete that circuit, otherwise my GM solenoid (that I did indeed order from GM, before I realized that it was a White Rodgers unit, which I didn't learn until after I received it) would not work, because it was the type of solenoid that had trigger terminal connections that corresponded with the sealed Metri Pack connector. This post is getting long, so I'm going to cut it short here, with just a few more tips and pointers I gathered from my own factory battery wiring project. The GM wire harnesses are expensive. Most of them are worth it, because they have FUSIBLE LINKS already built into them. The time it takes to splice fusible links into bulk battery cable, and the consideration it may take to size the fusible links correctly for the current capacity of the cable being used, and to make those splices reliable... is worth the cost to pay GM to have done all that for you. However, there is one wire harness that isn't worth buying from GM. It is a simple 12 guage wire that goes from the additional fuse connection box to the trailer wiring post in the Underhood Electrical Center. That wire isn't worth the high cost. It has no fusible links or special terminals on the ends, just closed eyelets. I would source this wire locally, but believe it or not, even that is easier said than done. It can actually be quite difficult. Most auto parts stores only carry wire based on low price point. It is typically PVC jacketed, and only rated to 80 degrees C. GM recommends (and requires their partners) to use CROSS-LINKED POLYETHYLENE jacketed wire (denoted by _XL, like "SXL", where XL stands for cross linked) for under hood and under body applications, with a temperature class rating of 125 degrees C. The best wire I've every been able to find locally without special ordering it is only rated to 105 degrees C. There is a reason why GM and Ford issue bulletins to upfitters stating that to have their modifications approved, the wire needs to be 125 degrees C. I think that's enough for now. You should be well on your way to a factory quality installation with the wiring diagram and the parts print. I never liked the aftermarket kits either, including the vaunted "Painless" kits. Like you, I prefer to follow as much OEM engineering as possible. It can be "painful" to do sometimes though.
5Alive replied to weasel897's topic in 1999-2006 & 2007-2013 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 1500We might need more details about your 2003 Yukon XL to help you rule out some possibilities. The door opening event that turns power on the radio, or rather powers the amp to the radio (why we need to know more about your vehicle) is normal. The chimes play through the radio speakers, left front in particular, hence the audio system internally powers up on the door opening. And the radio is wired to retained accessory power (RAP), so the radio power remains until the door is opened at the destination, or after a set period of time. So that eliminates door opening events being the issue. But speaker pops are not normal. It could be a connection to an amplifier module under your center console, or a failed module itself. But before guessing any further, provide more details... Is your Yukon XL a Denali? What RPO codes does it have related to audio? Check the label of codes on the flip down door of your glove box for UQ7 and/or Y91. That will tell us if you have an amp under your center console, as well as what type of amp it is. Do you have ANY aftermarket products or wiring? It doesn't matter whether it is connected and working or not. A provision to connect an iPod player? A back up camera? A blue tooth module? An alarm system? Even if the aftermarket device has nothing to do with the radio, sometimes the installation process, and/or the 12v ignition circuits tapped to facilitate the installation, can effect audio systems deleteriously, and oftentimes not right away. Knowing any and everything "extra" you have may provide more clues for diagnosis. If I had to guess, I think you have a harness connection issue between your head unit and your amp under the console. I'm basing this guess on the assumption that you have UQ7. There are many other possibilities though, so post more about what you know, and that may help someone help you better.
5Alive replied to splash07s's topic in 2000-2006 & 2007-2014 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 2500HD/3500HDMost scanners will not read body codes... only OBDII mandated codes. You didn't say what scanner you used, but I have tried various scanners that simply do not read body and chassis error codes unrelated to engine or emissions, even though I already confirmed through GM that the truck's modules were storing error codes.
5Alive replied to lickarock's topic in 2000-2006 & 2007-2014 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 2500HD/3500HDSounds like the root cause of the problem is the oiled filter. If the purpose of replacing the factory filter with an aftermarket filter is for "better performance", and yet the use and deployment of the aftermarket filter leads to the engine throwing codes and having to hitch a ride to the auto parts store, then is the performance really "better" than stock? I run the high capacity stock air filter, and never once had a single engine code set. A "better performing" air filter is one that allows the truck to run trouble free, without worry about not oiling the filter enough and dusting the engine, or oiling the filter too much and fouling the MAF, or oiling the filter every other month so as to keep it oiled, but not over oil it. That's a lot of worry and work. Then on top of that, deciding what to clean the MAF with, and worry about the long term effect of the substance on other sensors. Yikes. Interestingly enough, the GM Performance Parts aftermarket filter makes a point of advertising that it is not oiled. That speaks volumes in and of itself. The GM factory High Capacity stock air filter has a huge amount of surface area. It will flow all the air a naturally aspirated engine can suck in. At the end of the day, it might be the best performing, when considering the inconveniences of the oiled aftermarket alternatives.
5Alive replied to Keepontrying's topic in 2000-2006 & 2007-2014 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 2500HD/3500HDI have more questions than answers, but I'll give the answers you asked for first (thoughts and opinions). Let's say you take your tires and wheels to be "road force" balanced with the Hunter 9700 road force balancer. Immediately after the first tire and wheel assembly is "road force" balanced... immediately after the tire technician removes that first balanced tire and wheel from the 9700's spindle... kindly ask that that same balanced tire and wheel be remounted to the machine to check for balance again. It is IMPORTANT to wait until just AFTER the tire and wheel are REMOVED from the machine, but ask BEFORE the tech mounts the next tire and wheel assembly. He will look at you like you are crazy, but he will be confident to prove to you that the tire and wheel assembly he just balanced will indeed be balanced when he remounts it. I'm not so confident. Unless the specific correct adapter is used for the hub centric wheel in question, and unless more time than usually afforded is taken to mount the tire to the machine, the machine ended up only balancing the specific, idiosyncratic, and most likely unrepeatable way in which the tire and wheel were initially chucked up to the machine. By asking the tech to rechuck the same tire and wheel he just balanced back onto the same machine, you are about to prove this theory. Without a single exception, on the second time around, I have shocked the technician from cockiness to disbelief when the tire and wheel he just balanced a few minutes earlier turns up unbalanced again... not by a little, but by a lot. 4.00 ounces. And this is on the high dollar Hunter 9700 road force balancer. There is nothing wrong with the machine. It is correctly and sensitively reporting the difference between how the tire was chucked up to the machine's spindle the first time, versus how it was chucked up the second time. Here is the key: Those time efficient "universal" taper cone chucks do not do the hub centric wheels justice. The problem is, for a tire shop to order all the specific adapters to every wheel is very expensive tooling to have on hand, and very time consuming and training intensive to get employees to do. So, if your tire technician proves to be the single exception to the rule that I have found in my experience... proved by the first tire and wheel showing 0.00 on both sides after having been REMOVED completely from the machine, and then remounted to the machine and tested again, then by all means proceed and have that tire technician complete the other three tire and wheel assemblies. If, as I suspect, you find that the remount of the first tire and wheel does not repeat the balanced state it was in before, then you'll have to decide whether or not it is worth the additional expense to continue the exercise of "balanced" in name, but not in deed. Obviously, the way the tire and wheel chuck up to the truck will be different yet again from the way it is chucked up to the machine. One (expensive) way to achieve dynamic balance of the entire rotating assembly the way the wheel is chucked to the truck, along with balancing the brake rotor, hub, and indeed the entire rotating assembly, including the mud, snow, and rocks stuck in the tire grooves, is with Balance Masters (encapsulated mercury, much quieter) or Centramatic (shot beads in oil, louder, but no mercury) dynamic balancers mounted between the wheel and the rotor hub flange. I have these on my trucks (both brands, depending on wheel type). So those are my thoughts and opinions. Now on to my questions: How did you determine that your REAR cab mounts needed to be replaced? Was there a visual indication? Did you just start with the pair that was easiest to access? Were you attempting to swap the cab mounts furthest away from both the front and the rear axles, where the frame would have the greatest deviation from the plane established by either axle, subject to the limitation of spring travel? What inspired you to pick the rear cab mounts, instead of say, the middle cab mounts? If you experienced a 60% to 70% improvement after replacing the rear cab mounts, why weren't you tempted to continue in that successful direction and replace the rest of the cab mounts, instead of moving to other things like wheel & tire balance, or shocks? What made you decide that just the rear cab mounts were "enough."? When you removed the rear cab mounts, did you notice (or measure, but I doubt anyone measures disassembly torque outside of FEA) how tight or loose they were? You mentioned the first thing that you checked were the cab mount bolts. How did you "check" them? What were you checking for? Bolt torque? Cushion compression? Assuming that in the process of replacing the rear cab mounts with new pieces, you tightened the rear cab mounts to the assembly torque called for in the book, is it possible that if you tightened the existing cushions to the same torque, that the improvement you noticed would be the same? These are all genuine, not loaded questions. I do not know the answers to any of them, and have no guesses as to what the answers should be or lead to. But I have always been curious about the influence of cab mount durometers and torque in mitigating road imperfections, and you are the first person I've read of who noticed such a large improvement in ride quality from replacing cab mounts that had less than 36,000 miles on them. I have heard of cab mounts getting replaced from creaking and clicking, where the threads of the thru bolt are washboarding over a horizontal flange in the assembly. But your situation is different, and I'm very curious about it.
5Alive replied to sareljr's topic in 2000-2006 & 2007-2014 Chevrolet Silverado & GMC Sierra 2500HD/3500HDAnd not just any scanner will read that code, since the TCCM is not a federally mandated module that needs to be universally compliant with the OBDII protocol. Repeat: A generic OBDII scanner will NOT be able to read the trouble code you are looking for with the transfer case that is causing the Service 4WD message to appear. The code set is a GM proprietary chassis code, so you will need a Tech 2 or like govtech4 said, a "real" scanner to get your code. Alternatively, if you have an active OnStar subscription, you can press the OnStar key and have them read you every single number on their screen after they scan your vehicle. The OnStar operator will more than likely not understand what he or she is reading, but they don't have to. Listen for any number that sounds like "C03xx", where xx will most likely be the number 27. The "C" stands for "Chassis" codes... in other words, the codes that the free rental scanner at the auto parts store cannot read. Chassis trouble code C0327 indicates a fault with the encoder motor sensor, which is consistent with your symptoms, and is also typical of your model year and drivetrain. My 2005 6.0 had the same trouble code, and a new sensor fixed it. As for OnStar, unlike previous model years, the 2005 model years have dual system (digital/analog) telematics equipment that remains compatible with the current digital only OnStar service. If your new to you truck is thus equipped, and you were thinking of subscribing anyway, then that subscription will solve your proprietary trouble code scanning issue to diagnose the problem you are having. While the fault is highly likely to be the encoder motor sensor, it is not always. In earlier years, it was the switch, although by 2004/5 people who were replacing switches found that they were really just throwing parts at the problem based on what worked in previous years, and the problem recurred again until they scanned the truck to find out what the real problem was. If the Service 4WD message light came on, then a code was set. Get that code before paying for parts to be thrown at it.
Most OnlineNewest Member
Who's Online 146 Members, 2 Anonymous, 701 Guests (See full list)
- Ryan Sextro
- Jim Schmidt
- Jon A
- BLACK BOWTIE
- HD Dave 2016HD
- MD Chevy
- Big bad
- juan carlos ugalde
- George Palmer
- Isaiah Martinez
- Old Goat 45
- BO TIE 1
- Logan Lanfear
- Tim B.
- Ric Paxton
- [email protected]
- Wesam N Crystal Kada