By on September 23, 2010

Anarchy in the TTAC! It turns out that Michael Karesh and I both got invited to short-lead Scion tC press events. His review is found here and nicely covers things like the sound system, recent sales numbers, and the American economy. It’s so comprehensive that I didn’t feel the need to attend my press preview.

I did, however, feel the need to pay my bookie, so I am dutifully submitting this piece to offset a small amount of my personal debt. If you are not in the mood to read two reviews of this car, I have helpfully summarized my review in one sentence, posted “before the jump” for your convenience:

Given sufficient velocity and violence of application, it is possible to set the brakes on fire.

I autocrossed a previous-generation Scion tC in a few different regions, usually finishing in the top half of H Stock, ahead of the rest of the street-tire mongrel dabblers but well off the pace of the properly-set-up Mini Coopers. The original tC was a type of car which was once vanishingly rare but is now increasingly common: one with too much rolling stock. If the little-ish Toyota had a soul, and that soul wanted to fly, surely that soul was weighed down to earth by the enormous alloy wheels and steamroller tires attached to each corner. Rarely has a car of the tC’s modest size felt so weighty and deliberate on the road.

One the move, that first tC was so relentlessly interested in going straight regardless of input that I found myself using the handbrake to turn the car in tighter sections. It was simply reluctant to turn and the overall dynamic package was far more Somerset Regal than Calais 442, if you know what I mean, and I think you do. It struck me as a perfect conveyance for somebody who wants an affordable Japanese coupe but has no interest in going fast. I would have taken the last-generation Celica GT-S and a kick in the face over the Scion tC.

So now we have a new one, with a little more power and a little more weight. Commendably, it’s exactly the same size. Perhaps Toyota has learned from the xB debacle. A conversation I had with one of Toyota’s PR people went something like this:

Me: “Why is the new xB so freakin’ huge, dude?”

PR: “Well, Scion does better than anybody else at reaching out to our customers. We asked thousands of them what they wanted us to do with the xB. Virtually all of them said they wanted more room, more space, more power, more car.” Thoughtful pause. “They may have been lying.”

I was given a 14-mile loop on which to drive the new tC, and I was given a media co-driver. Thankfully, that media co-driver was Alex Nunez, well-known to most of you from his work with Autoblog and ConsumerSearch. Alex is one of those hard-ass New York types that I knew so well as a kid and I expected him to man up for his passenger stint. After a few words, we were off.

I’d chosen a six-speed manual tC with the “TRD Big Brake package”. My experience of aftermarket brake packages is that most of them suck. Typically, they don’t take master cylinder size into account, they don’t work correctly with the factory ABS or stability-control systems, and they often produce less clamping power than the standard cheapo factory setups despite looking better. A look at the Scion owner “brand ambassadors” who had brought their cars for the press preview didn’t ease my mind on the TRD kit’s likely virtues; they all looked like they had stepped off the set of “The Ali G Show”, being as ghetto fabulous as their parents’ money could make them. Clearly not performance drivers, and the Chinese tires wrapped around their “dubs” reinforced the point. If Scion was aiming at them with this kit, they weren’t aiming high.

Oh well. Time to drive. My first test — can the TRD brakes operate effectively in ABS? — was positive. In fact, on the loose road surface available to us, Alex and I were coming in on the ABS time and time again, chattering and skipping down from all the velocity the chunky 2.5-liter four could produce. That four, by the way… it’s not a performance engine. It doesn’t want to rev and it lets you know in a dozen unsubtle audible and tactile ways. Still, it will boot the car down the road. Alex said it sounded “sneezy” or something to that effect.

Next test. Stability control. Over a hump that put the nose of the car temporarily airborne, I cranked the wheel half a turn and kicked the brakes, starting a relatively strong oscillation. With a few blinks of the light, we were straightened out. Okay. That’s good. So far, these brakes appear to be as safe as the stockers. How good are they?

I spent the next six miles working on generating fade. Every turn was a late, full brake. I must have engaged ABS two dozen times from nontrivial speed. Down a steep hill we went, and I used the last trick in my book — the “rookie brake”. A rookie brake is dragging the pads against the brake for two hundred feet before stomping into ABS. It’s what racing rookies who are concerned about making a corner like to do, and it’s a brake killer. Nope. There was light fade at best (or worst).

We screeched to a final halt at the bottom of that long hill and I heard that familiar “hiss-WHOOSH-hiss”. Yes, there was smoke drifting around our cabin now. The pads, the pads, the pads were on fire! Mr. Nunez laughed. A woman in a Camry stared at us. We moved on.

This is a good car, in the sense that it is made well, reasonably priced, and likely to last a long time. Scion says they expect the buyers to be more than half male. If that’s the case, I think that business about estrogen in the water must be true. I can’t see a man buying this for himself, unless that “man” wears skinny pants and listens to Dashboard Confessional. It’s priced about two grand away from the street price of a base Mustang V-6 six-speed. I knew a guy who raced a Scion tC in NASA. We used to laugh at him, even though he was pretty quick, and since “we” were driving Neons, Miatas, Civics, and a Ecotec-powered Cavalier, I think that says something.

It may not be a “man’s car”, but it’s still decent, and the brakes are decent, too. If your mom says you have to get your graduation present at the Toyota dealer, this is your best choice.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

50 Comments on “Review: 2011 Scion tC with “TRD Big Brakes”...”

  • avatar
    Educator(of teachers)Dan

    Somerset Regal… The more things change the more they stay the same.  Thanks for reinforcing that foreign companies get to produce vehicles that American companies would be snickered at for making.

  • avatar

    This article made me laugh out loud twice: “I would have taken the last generation Celica GT-S and a kick in the face over the Scion tC” and “unless that “man” wears skinny pants and listens to Dashboard Confessional”.   Good stuff.
    I agree with the comment about new cars with too much rolling stock.  My 90 Miata is very sensitive to wheel weight — the lighter the car the more the wheel/tire weight affect the handling.

    • 0 avatar

      Just about every modern car suffers for having too much wheel.  Many of them ride pretty badly, too, and snow (or replacement) tires end up being quite costly.
      The first car I saw it one was the Mini (the base model’s tires make for a much more fun ride, despite being gutless) and most recently the Ford Flex (which feels much, much larger than the old Freestyle or, say, the Toyota Sienna because of the fat feet it’s got).

    • 0 avatar
      Educator(of teachers)Dan

      Or my future MIL Torrent which rides on 17s and I know will give her a heart murmur when it comes time to replace them.

    • 0 avatar

      Talking of wheel weight, I helped a neighbor change a tire the other week and the full sized steel spare seemed to weigh far less than the alloy with the flat. Is this the case with pretty much all ‘alloy’ wheels these days? I thought the point was to make wheels as light as possible… or do most people not care and want something that looks pretty?

    • 0 avatar
      Educator(of teachers)Dan

      I thought the point was to make wheels as light as possible… or do most people not care and want something that looks pretty?
      It’s cause they’re PIMP that way.  What other reason is there for an optional 20in wheel package on a freaking Ford EDGE?  Give them BUBBLE B-Body Boys a run for their money!

    • 0 avatar

      Agreed on the rolling stock front… @majo too the Miata example I was going to use and ran with it.  I suppose if I were racing or autox-ing I’d do well with more tire, but on the road it’s a rare situation where those teensy 14 inchers with the star specs aren’t more than enough.
      And the 17″ 45 series tires on my e46 seem to be more than enough tire for the car… but when I pull along side any generic ‘box at a stop light these days it seems to be rocking the 18 and aboves from the factory. I just don’t see what that gets you besides dub-lite…
      Maybe it’s just time for me to start complaining and getting these damn kids off my lawn ;)

    • 0 avatar

      The optional wheel package on the Ford Edge Sport is 22″. TWENTY TWO INCHES.
      The OE tires (Pirelli Scorpion Zero Assimetrico) from tirerack are $240. Each. They last 20k miles. $0.05/mile just on tires.
      The Edge SE rocks 235/65R17 rubber, which run $126 each. They last 35-55k miles. $0.014/mile at 35k miles.

    • 0 avatar

      I would have taken the last-generation Celica GT-S and a kick in the face over the Scion tC.
      Great quote from story also.

    • 0 avatar

      Is this the case with pretty much all ‘alloy’ wheels these days?

      Pretty much, though part of that might be the width of the spare.

      You can still get lightweight alloys of a respectable size, but you can also feel the price difference between them and the heavy cosmetic rims most cars ship with.  The lighter rims are also incredibly fragile, especially at the sizes we’re seeing now.

      The new Edge, by the way, looks terrible on 22s. Much of of it is the wheel well gap: if you’re going to roll on tires like that, at least try not to make it look like you’ve got a lift kit.

    • 0 avatar

      You can get light and strong wheels, but they cost a fortune comapred to “normal” alloys. Say 1300€ for a set of 17″s or 18″s compared to about 450€. I´ve had a set of 17″ OZ Superleggeras and a set of 18″ OZ Ultraleggeras, and they are pretty tough and light.

      The only time i managed to break one is when i hit a curb hard enough to bend the suspension and snap the brake-disk in half.. The wheel was still straight but a 5x5cm chunk was missing. The concrete curb had a similar chunk missing. Cerainly a lot tougher and lighter than most “tuning” wheels which would have looked like pretzels long before that little incident. They roughly weighed 7kg for 17″ and 8kg for 18′”, + tyre. You can pretty easily lift them with one hand with the tyre on. Some wheels the same size easily weigh over twice as much. Im sure you can get even lighter and tougher wheels but the lighter OZ wheels have a pretty good strenght / weight / price ratio IMO. And they look good on many cars.

  • avatar

    “Scion does better than anybody else at reaching out to our customers”

    Not better than GM! Customers wanted the Aztek, SSR, HHR, Solstice, Sky, a Saab SUV, and a new El Camino, and they got all of those except the El Camino, which was a stillborn Pontiac for some reason. And don’t forget, customers also asked for the “World’s First Denali Crossover.” Done!

    • 0 avatar

      The HHR has sold extremely well when you look at the numbers, and upon its release GM had to go three shifts to keep up with demand (hey you brought it up).
      As for the Holden Commodore Ute, it is one of the hottest sellers in Australia, the Maloo is the stuff of dreams.  Given its Holden heritage the Pontiac G8 ST was the logical placement for the vehicle.  It isn’t entirely stillborn; it is quite alive actually down under as the Holden Commodore Ute SS-V Series Special Edition, Pontiac nose and all.  It sells quite well.
      Not sure what issues you have with the Solstice/SKY.  Take a look at the SCCA Nationals results and they are extremely competitive in their class against the Miata (and I’m not defining competitive as hey, they got 8th place once – check the results yourself).
      The Aztek and the Saab SUV you’re spot on, along with the SSR.

    • 0 avatar

      I think the issues with the sky/solstice are the same issues with the new camaro (weird ergonomics and oddly constructed trunks).

  • avatar

    I still can’t believe that Toyota still insists on using “TuRD” for their performance moniker…

  • avatar

    I know a guy that owns a tC. He bought it a couple years ago after he got divorced at around 59 years old. It replaced an Exploder Sport Trac. His hobbies are drinking and smoking. He’s pretty manly so I was surprised when I learned that he drove it.

  • avatar

    Sounds like the brakes were self-extinguishing, at no added cost. Porsche would hook you for that.

  • avatar

    Very nice writing Jack. The tC sounds like a youth vehicle that is the perfect stepping stone to life long Camry ownership.

  • avatar

    If your mom says you have to get your graduation present at the Toyota dealer, this is your best choice.


  • avatar

    If I were the pimple faced high schooler who found himself in that “good news/bad news” situation, I’d forget about looking fast and get a Tundra 4×2 with the 5.7L.  It’s certainly slower, but probably a lot more fun.

  • avatar

    Entertaining as usual, JB.

    A few things though.  Refreshed yes, but I don’t think we can call the 2011 a different “generation,” even if the manufacturers would prefer that we do so (semantics I know).

    Second, the Scion press hack forgot to mention that new xB doesn’t offer more space than the old one.  It offers less if I’m not mistaken, which qualifies it as a complete failure, aside from straight-line performance (more on that later).

    Lastly, it was mentioned previously, that in the tC’s first few years of existence, male buyers outnumbered female buyers.  That has since reversed.  Why?  Back in 2005, guys thought they were finally getting a Toyota sports car.  Pent up demand even.  The truth came out eventually, and we realized Toyota provided us with a decent looking slug of a car for chicks in college.  Sporting pretense at best.

    So now they’ve gone and butched a chick car.  Good thinking.  Whether it looks better or worse is irrelevant.  They’re aiming for the cocks.  Oh, and it’s still a slug in a straight line, which is all the Average Joe or Jane cares about in terms of performance.

  • avatar

    Several years ago, I wanted aluminum wheels, and bigger wheels than the steel 15 inchers that came with my accord. But the more research I did, the more it became obvious they would more likely slow me down, the kicker when I discovered that the aluminum wheels were not lighter than the steels.
    Anyway, great article. You’re harder (a lot harder) on cars you test drive than I am. When I was buying the only new car I ever got, some of the salesmen at the Saturn dealership thought I was a factory spy.

  • avatar

    Alex works for ConsumerSearch, not Consumer Guide. I hunted for his account, but he doesn’t seem to have posted one yet. Only photos so far, and none unfortunately of the brakes on fire:

    I haven’t driven the original tC since 2006 or so. Jack, any significant difference in how the new one steers and handles?

  • avatar

    Finally, a sane Scion tC review and properly calling out that with a hair more coin ($2K is about $34 a month in car payments) one can buy a much better car, with an engine built for a sport coupe – and there are tons of other options, some right in the same price range.  A long list of options include:
    Scion tC base with 6-speed manual.  There isn’t pricing on the Scion sight for the 2011 TRD big brake kit, for the 2010 it is $1,350 before install (say 2 hours labor at $85 an hour plus 5% tax on parts and labor for $1,600 more in round math:  $20.6K or…
    1) Nissan Sentra SE-R V-Spec $20K – 200 HP with all the goodies, admittedly butt ugly
    2) VW GTI $23.5K – 200 HP with all the goodies, plus a lot more
    3) Genesis Coupe 2.0T – $21K – 210 HP
    4) Genesis Coupe 3.8 – $25K – a big stretch but 308 HP
    5) Ford Mustang V6 Base – $22K – yes $22K, 305 HP, 6-speed manual, blistering performance, and 31 MPG too – dirt cheap insurance as it is a V6 secretary car
    6) Chevrolet Camaro V6 Base – $22.5K – yes $22.5K, 312 HP – 6-speed manual, great performance, 29 MPG
    7) Mini Cooper – $20K – OK just 121 HP but the Mini does a lot with 121 HP and it sure can outrun the Scion tC in a track setting
    8) Mini Cooper S – $23.5K – more HP, and runs circles around the Scion tC
    9) Honda Civic Si Coupe – $22K – more HP, lots of goodies
    10) Subaru Impreza WRX – $25K – yes, like the Genesis 3.8 this is the outlier, and there is a $6K price gap, but I’m putting it in the club
    11) Mitsubishi Eclipse GS – $19K (the obvious competitor in the class)
    12) 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt SS Coupe – $24.5K (down to inventory on hand, discontinued)
    13) VW Jetta SE – $20.5K, you’re short 10 HP but get a touch screen stereo, leather (or as in most cars today leatherish), and that sunroof
    No, you can’t compare a loaded Mustang to a base Scion tC and then go see the tC is a value (as someone suggested in the other Scion tC review)  This is about bang for the buck performance.  If you take a base Scion and don’t put one penny into it, the car is a good value, given it doesn’t have an engine tuned for a sports coupe and is wrong wheel drive.
    Here is one other rub.  The 2011 Scion tC doesn’t come with a keyless remote entry alarm standard.  That is a $500 dealer installed option (surprise).  The lack and the cost almost offsets the missing sunroofs in the above models.
    I don’t see why anyone would buy a Scion tC especially if they plan to pour additional money into it.  There are plenty of better options when you factor in the total cost of upgrades/modifications to raise up the performance level.

    • 0 avatar

      Remote keyless entry is standard. Only the alarm is optional, and you can certainly find one for less than $500. Alarms are standard on few if any of the listed cars.
      Adding the big brakes also isn’t justified, since few if any of the listed cars have similar brakes as standard equipment.
      The Mustang is $22,995. You’ve rounded off nearly an entire grand. The MSRP difference is $4,000, not $2,000.
      Adjusting for feature differences adds another $2,000 to the difference, most of it from the panoramic sunroof (you won’t find one optional anywhere for under a grand). And this is before noting that the stock audio system in the Mustang has 80 watts vs. the Scion’s 300.
      Figure you can get $1,000 off the Mustang. There’s still about a $5,000 difference between the two cars. Not pocket change.
      If you want valid price comparisons:

    • 0 avatar

      Say cheese!
      2010 Mazda Mazdaspeed3

    • 0 avatar

      First of all, I got the base price of the Mustang from Ford’s site:
      If you have a beef with $21,145 you can take that issue up with Ford, along with TTAC which said in the write up:
      It’s priced about two grand away from the street price of a base Mustang V-6 six-speed…
      Missing content beyond performance content if we’re going to compare out of the box versus out of the box is pointless; it is a red herring.  How much money do I have to spend on a 2011 Scion tC to make up for the 125HP deficiency over the Mustang for starters???  Do we want to do that math and then see which is the better deal? Sure we could slap a NOS kit on that Scion on the cheap I guess, but then what is its usable life if we’re boosting every time we sprint from a traffic light to get 305 HP under the right foot.  A few months?
      What about other cars on the list that come in at the same price point (or within a negligible difference) and do offer the same content, and more, like the Jetta SL as a prime example.  You’re short 10 HP but get a touch screen stereo, power every, a sunroof, leatherish interior, a practical rear seat, 22/30 MPG rating, 6 gears in the console, German handling, and 0 to 60 in 8.2 seconds.  Lets also add that VW is paying for all the regular maintenance for 3 years / 36,000 miles on that car.  The tires will be cheaper to replace (rolling stock is 16″) and likely cheaper to insure.  This sure would push the buttons on the frugal 20-something.
      The Mini Cooper is another example of a car that comes in at practically the same price, will run circles around the tC in competent hands on an autocross course, has indisputable resale value, brand mojo, and 20-something coolness.  At 0 to 60 in 8.5 seconds for a base Mini, the performance is in the same club as the 2011 Scion tC.

    • 0 avatar

      @ajla you are 100% correct,
      14) MazdaSPEED3 – $23.3K – 263 HP, 6-speed manual, power every, dual zone climate control, Bluetooth, etc. etc. etc.

    • 0 avatar

      The Mustang V6 starts at $22,995 when you include the desitination fee. It’s $22,145 without it.
      The ’11 tC is $19,060 with destination, $18,275 without.
      The tC isn’t really a performance car though. I’m betting the vast majority will be automatics that sell on features and Toyota reputation. I generally think of it as a really competent Corolla coupe.

    • 0 avatar

      Holden – $3k isn’t pocket change to someone searching for a $19k car.  And, as I commented on your last post in the last review, some people simply want the neatest looking car with the most modern features they can get for a certain amount of money.  The tC will be cheap to own and operate (unlike the GTI*), it looks relatively cool, it is FWD so it isn’t going to bite badly when the driver pushes too hard, and it has a little bit of mod potential for when mom and dad ask the 19 year old owner what he wants for his birthday.  Both reviews seem to say it does just fine at what it set out to do. 
      And the V6 base mustang without track pack has a 2.73 final drive.  And it gets 31 mpg only with the automatic.  Those two facts tell me that it is a 300hp car that has been neutered for the sake of marketing.  And it is 400lbs more than the tC.  The tC’s gearing is far more aggressive than that of the non-track-pack Mustang (when multiplying ratios out by final drive). 

      Again, just let it be.  It is supposed to be a sporty little coupe for people just getting started out in life.  It offers a 180hp 6MT that is geared pretty aggressively and it looks sporty.  The reviews seem to agree that it does what it is supposed to do. 

      * After owning a 2007 GTI through 60k miles, there is nothing low cost about owning and operating a VW. It isn’t the first 36k miles that maintenance is expensive… it is the out of warranty stuff that gets you. To go further, it isn’t the regularly scheduled maintenance that gets you, either. VW has a fantastic way of having you regularly replace parts that never fail on other cars. My handbrake handle/sleeve/cover snapped off in my hand at 58k miles! I loved that car, but owning it out of warranty wasn’t a risk I was willing to take.

    • 0 avatar

      I’ve been looking at both cars lately and you’re nuts if you think they’re even vaguely in the same price class.  Even the stripped base Mustang with the regular gearing is going to be $4K more with destination, and even if you could find one with no options at all it’d be a penalty box without at least some options ticked off.  In all honesty you’re looking at much closer to $25K for the V6 Mustang.  It’s a much faster car but it’s a huge price difference.

  • avatar

    The tC is better than anything from GM, Ford, or Chrysler.  Did you see the CD review of the new Ford Fiesta?  Honda Fit, and Mazda 2 outperformed the Ford.  I bet the tC is as good or better than the Honda Fit.  Wish CD would have included that vehicle in their test.  Since tC is at the top of it’s game, the Detroit boys are left with the “girl’s car” smear.  Sorry.  No one buys that.  What happened to the tC is an “old man’s car” smear?

    See the ford test at

  • avatar

    Never heard of “Dashboard Confessional”, so what about a guy who listens to My Love is a Stapler and other [email protected] fare?

  • avatar

    You know what?  I really liked the last Celica GT-S.  Say what you will, but it’s the best Integra Honda never made.

  • avatar

    I read this review because you wrote it. My opinion about those cars is meh. And now I’ll have to check the other one to see interior and hamster roller pics. @#$%&

  • avatar

    This one made me laugh out loud. Fun as always, Jack!
    Hear, hear about the tires… I’ve sampled the Mini on both sizes (the base 15s and the 17s) on the racetrack, and the 15s definitely drove better… allowed those of us driving regular Coopers to keep up with the Cooper S’s on the twisty bits. Part of what i loved about the Mazda2 was the “sane” tire sizing… 185/55R15 is certainly a lot better than the inch-larger sizes the Yaris and Fit wear.
    8 seconds? 180 hp? I remember the time you only needed 140 hp (in a four door) to do the same. How time flies…

  • avatar

    Yup. The tC for me is a chick car. A friend of mine who is a graphic designer has one and she absolutely loves it. Before she bought it, I was almost convinced that with a few TRD accessories it might be the next Celica GT-S. Then she let me drive it and all of those hopes flew out the door.
    Yeah JB…I’ll take that kick in the face for the old Celica GT-S thanks.

  • avatar

    The sportiest car on the Toyota lot is a truck, the Tacoma X-runner.  236hp, 6 speed, RWD bilstein’s  $25K, and its also a perfectly decent truck.

  • avatar

    I remember when Sport Compact Car got hold of one of these.  Even after a host of bolt-ons and a bunch more power, it was still much slower around the track than their Integra. 8 seconds slower.  They said the steering couldn’t keep up even when it was bone-stock on the track.  Plus, it was simply too heavy.
    I test drove a first generation used model out of curiosity and while it was smooth, solidly constructed, rode well and comfortable (I’m 6’2″), it simply had no punch whatsoever.  I kept waiting for it to hit the powerband all the way up to redline, but it never happened.  It felt exactly like driving a more stiffly sprung Camry.  If anything, this car just strengthens the case that most of today’s compact cars have no soul.

  • avatar

    “The pads, the pads, the pads were on fire!”
    Laughed out loud.
    Great review.

  • avatar

    Is it geared more towards chicks? Maybe…but my wife and I drove a ton of cars in order to find her next car…anything from a 500 to an Optima in size, features, etc…and you know what? She liked the tC the best. I liked the way it drove, too. And I’m okay with that. We pick up our new tC Monday morning. Sure, there are tons of cars (admirably listed above) that are faster, better handling, (name your performance figure here)…but for what we’re paying, we feel comfortable that we’ll have a long and reliable ride that will give us driving pleasure for years to come. If you don’t like the car, it’s pretty easy…don’t buy it. I’m not a fan of many cars I see on the road, but there ya go…somebody else obviously did.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Art Vandelay: Additionally, the AT itself was IBM’s second gen home PC, following the XT. Prior to that you had...
  • Art Vandelay: If you do so much as disturb the dirt in the dried out portions of the Salton Sea doesn’t a toxic...
  • eggsalad: I’m glad that a very limited number of people had the combination of wealth and bad taste it took to...
  • RHD: The one trick pony just has to keep repeating the same trick. EVs are improving every year (every month,...
  • RHD: The steering wheel is pretty nice, though, and part of the side view is elegant. The rest of it is unbearably...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber