2014 Toyota Tundra 1794 Edition Review

2014 Toyota Tundra 008 II

By Aaron Bragman

When you think of full-size pickups trucks, do you think Ford or Chevrolet? Or maybe little brother Ram? Well, if you're 1 in 10 pickup buyers, you think Toyota. The Japanese manufacturer would like more people to think Toyota and intends to try and draw in more customers for 2014 with an update to its Tundra full-size pickup. Yes, most of the changes are cosmetic, but the Tundra still offers solid equipment and capabilities from the 2013 model. One of the biggest changes is the addition of a new top luxury trim package, the 1794 Edition, which is the model I spent a week with in the depths of a Michigan winter.

First, we need to address the obvious question: 1794 Edition? What does that mean? Well, hang on tight because this is stretched marketing at its finest. The Toyota plant in which the Tundra is built is near San Antonio and sits on land that the company bought from the oldest working cattle ranch in the state, the JLC Ranch. That ranch was founded in — you guessed it — 1794 by Spanish colonist Juan Ignacio de Casanova. It's a fancy trim level meant to go up against the luxury trucks from the Detroit Three, like the Ford's F-150 King Ranch, Ram's Laramie Longhorn and Chevy's Silverado High Country. I guess it beats calling it the Tundra Casanova.


The Tundra has received a pretty thorough cosmetic update for 2014, starting with an exterior that's more aggressive and physically bigger than the model it replaces. Check out that new grille — that has to be the biggest grille in the truck market today. It's so big, even the grille has a grille; it's mounted up on top of the chromed behemoth. New headlights with LED running lights flank the chrome. New sheet metal for the rest of the truck is subtle, with more squared-off wheel wells and fenders and a new rear-end treatment with the truck's name stamped into the tailgate. A new three-piece bumper out back replaces last year's one-piece, which should help lower replacement costs if it should get banged up. The overall look is still recognizably Tundra and communicates size and heft rather successfully, but it breaks no new ground for the brand.

The Tundra is available in five trim levels, each with their own "look," according to Toyota. The entry level is the work truck Tundra SR, followed by the volume-leading SR5, the more luxurious Limited and the range-topping Platinum. The 1794 Edition comes in above the Platinum, with more luxurious trim, special leather, cool accents and more. The Tundra is still offered in three cab styles: the two-door regular cab and four-door double cab, with standard 6.5-foot and optional 8-foot beds, and the even bigger four-door CrewMax, available only with a 5.5-foot bed.


The more noticeable changes to the 2014 Tundra are inside, where an all-new interior improves dramatically upon the 2013 model. Plastics get an upgrade in quality, designs and shapes are considerably more modern, and seats are more comfortable. The Tundra's dashboard is where the biggest improvements manifest, as Toyota has updated the look but retained the function of the previous model with big buttons and knobs that can be operated even while wearing thick gloves. My test truck was the 1794 Edition CrewMax, loaded with everything it could have.


2014 Toyota Tundra 031 II


The 1794 interior is certainly distinctive, and may be borderline kitschy. It has a Western motif to it, with saddle-colored leather, special stitching and leather on the dash, wood trim, stars here and there, and floormats that are a mix of thick rubber and carpet. The overall look isn't bad, but some of the material and color choices are a little over the top. The leather is almost orange in hue, and when matched up with the imitation wood trim, it looks a little cartoony. It certainly doesn't have the luxury truck feel of the Ram Laramie Longhorn or the Ford F-150 King Ranch (especially the all-new 2015 models), but it's pleasant enough in its own way.

There's certainly no shortage of space either, with the Tundra offering the largest cabins in the segment. Seats have been redesigned front and back, and are plenty comfortable for all passengers. Standard on the 1794 are heated and cooled front seats, and a rear bench that now folds up to allow for storage of bulky items in the cabin with an 11-inch lower lift-over height. One of the coolest features of the Tundra, and one that's unique to the truck, is the sliding rear window — we're not talking a small window flanked by two fixed panels that slides to the side. The entire rear back glass slides down into the cab, like the tailgate glass on an old 1984 Chevrolet Caprice Classic wagon.

The truck has Toyota's Entune multimedia system, which looks better than previous efforts but lacks the user-friendliness and sophistication of Detroit Three competitor systems. It also lacks any of the truck-specific apps that have become popular on competitor models. The premium JBL audio system is decent, but doesn't feature the clarity or punch of some high-end systems in competitor trucks. Overall, the switches and gauges look a little behind the times, despite the update.

Under the Hood

The powertrain is completely unchanged from 2013, with my top-level test truck featuring the 381-horsepower, 5.7-liter V-8 engine. It makes 401 pounds-feet of torque and is sufficient to get the Tundra moving smartly under hard acceleration or providing sufficient pulling power to haul a trailer or a load of logs in the shortened bed. The engine is mated to a smooth-shifting six-speed automatic transmission and sends power to the rear wheels; a part-time selectable four-wheel-drive system comes with the 1794 Edition.

The powertrain combination is perfectly acceptable for everyday use, providing plenty of power and decent acceleration accompanied by a snorty V-8 exhaust note that will turn heads. Highway passing is a breeze, and aside from some rather surprising levels of cabin noise at highway speeds, the Tundra feels calm and planted, if a little choppy in its ride quality. We should note that the choppiness smooths out considerably when the Tundra is under load, as I discovered after putting a face cord of firewood in the bed. Steering is light and highly boosted, as is common in full-size trucks, with a ratio that doesn't seem particularly quick in parking-lot maneuvers. Brakes are firm and progressive, and maintain their efficacy even under fully laden conditions. Testing the four-wheel-drive system in deep snow and ice on Michigan roads after a major winter storm proved quite enjoyable, as errands on back roads through unplowed rural townships proved almost boring for the big pickup.

2014 Toyota Tundra engine II

Where you'll definitely feel pain is at the fuel pump, with the Tundra's economy ratings coming in at the bottom of the barrel — 13/17/15 mpg city/highway/combined. I achieved 14.5 mpg in a week of combined highway and city driving, a less-than-stellar number and well below competitive vehicles in the segment. By comparison, the 5.7-liter Hemi engine in the Ram 1500 4x4 makes more power and torque than the 5.7-liter in the Tundra, but achieves 15/21/17 thanks to the optional eight-speed automatic transmission. GM's new 6.2-liter V-8 makes considerably more power and torque than the smaller Toyota engine, is also mated to a six-speed automatic, and even it delivers better fuel economy at 14/20/17 mpg. And Ram's new 1500 EcoDiesel gets 28 mpg highway, making the Tundra's 17 mpg even more egregious.


The cost for all this is a not-too-surprising $49,715. That's $47,320 for a 1794 CrewMax 4x4 (also available in 4x2 if you've no need for the extra traction), plus $470 for optional blind spot monitoring, $345 for running boards, $220 for "chrome clad" (read: "plastic") 20-inch wheels, $365 for a plastic bedliner and $995 for destination. Option one up for yourself here.

Putting things just shy of $50,000 puts the 1794 Edition within easy swinging distance of all of the major Western-themed luxo trucks on the market, such as the aforementioned F-150 King Ranch, Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn or Chevrolet Silverado High Country. A new level of luxo trucks is developing above this, however, given the F-150 Platinum and Ram 1500 Laramie Limited, further pointing to the fact that there truly is no upper limit when it comes to luxury truck prices. Compare the Tundra to similarly equipped competitors here.

Overall, the lack of powertrain and suspension progress in the Tundra is disappointing. The 2014 update seems to have been mostly cosmetic, and while this pickup did sorely need an interior update, leaving the powertrain and electronics alone will push the Tundra even further behind all-new pickups from GM and Ford this year, not that truckmakers aren't about to start playing serious catchup once the revolutionary new aluminum Ford F-150 is released. But Toyota's position, it seems to us, has never been about truly competing with the established truck players; it's been about providing a reasonably viable alternative to foreign-brand buyers who also wouldn't mind owning a truck from their favored brand. More than likely these are personal-use light-duty buyers, using the pickup in much the way I did: hauling firewood and building materials, not work-site duty or serious towing (something we'll try to do more of next time). The Tundra does well with low-demand tasks, but unless the next generation delivers some improvement in the powertrain and design departments (and maybe the TRD Pro Series is a step in the right direction), it risks falling further behind its increasingly impressive competitors.

To download our test unit's price sheet, click here

Cars.com images by Aaron Bragman

2014 Toyota Tundra 028 II

2014 Toyota Tundra 017 II

2014 Toyota Tundra 042 II

2014 Toyota Tundra 049 II

2014 Toyota Tundra 056 II

2014 Toyota Tundra 018 II



yawn.....we all know Fords the most American, its sad how GM and Dodge are messed up, ever seen that truck on silver creek? and we all know the robot towed the airplane, Tundras are ok I guess? Ford GM and Dodge are better tho. and are more American ford trucks built you in Texas.

the "1794" means it rides like a buggy from 1794.

The tail lights are starting to look Ram-like. Hopefully they'll soon copy ram's half-ton diesel engine option. I doubt many would give a dang about a Spanish colonist influenced pickup.

TRX4 Tom, you're not far off! The steering is quite numb until you hit a bump, then the only steering feedback you get is steering kick back and jitter felt in the wheel, the ride is very shaky, body roll is pretty excessive. The interior is pretty cheap. Lots of hard plastics (despite PUTC praising improvements,) weird locations for buttons (some you can't see behind the wheel,) the white text on the IP washes out and blends in with the silver finish in sunlight, and those rear seats are laughable when folded up. They flop around fore/aft excessively despite being latched when folded up. The rear window rolling up and down instead of a slider is pretty cool though! It's a truck for Toyota loyalists that will refuse to shop for a better truck in Ford, GM, or RAM.

yeah, Ford with their Fiestas and stink'n Lincolns from Mexico, and their imported from Turkey vans, they all build something in Mexico. Toyota even has Mazda building for them in Mexico, and a bunch of made in Japan cars hemi lol will sell you after he's done selling you on American made trucks. Believe what you want.

The biggest ripoff is the chrome clad wheels that all manufacturers are offering. They are nothing but plastic wheel covers. Ram wanted $400 dollars for these on my Big Horn. I said no thanks and kept the painted real aluminium wheels. I bet they will look like crap in 5-7 years.

Overall I like the look of the Tundra. I have seen the 1794 model in person, and it is WAY over the top for me in the styling department. I also agree that the wheels look cheap, especially in person. They look like plastic.

Not a fane of the 1794, the wheels look like they are from Pep Boys and the grill is too much. I think the Platinum or the limited look better and they are cheaper.

There is a reason the Tundra doesn't do better in volume (sales). This continues to be the truck they rolled out more than five years ago. Is there a single area where the Tundra outperforms any of its competitors (except the Titan)?

Papa Jim, It out preforms the competition in quality and price. Toyota is not offering the gimmicky fuel saving crap the competition is, its less stuff to break. In real world mileage it gets about the same at worse 1MPG difference. You can get a Crew Max limited for 44K, an SLT GMC is 49-50K minimum. Its engine is more advanced being a double overhead Cam 32 valve unit v.s GM and RAM still using pushrods.

Toyota needs a complete update from the tires up.
My guess would be that they need to sell more than 10000 a month to justify a complete update.
It is unlike Toyota to be playing catch up.

Chrome cladded anything, no matter the mfr. sucks.
Looks cheap.

Could not give a Hoot about what Toyota does with their trucks! They are not even on my short list & NEVER will be!

why did Toyota get rid of the reclining rear seats over ones that raise up? I'm not an engineer, but seems like it wouldn't be difficult to do both.

@John, dude you are just plain wrong.

The Tundra is competitive on MSRP but not on the out the door price. Ford, Chevy and RAM win that battle.

Tundra is also old-hat on the tech side. There's nothing particularly hi tech about the 32 valve V8. Toyota has been making one for about 25 years now.

Ditto Ford/Lincoln.

For the record, an OHC engine raced in the 1925 Indy 500.

most of you guys are spot on with the comments. The only functional thing that is better on this truck vs my 2010 is the clearer view of the instrument panel / gauges. I will try and take off the barrels on mine sometime to match the 2014 Tundra. I test drove the 2014, electronic nannies mess with the power even sooner now and cant turn em off like in my truck. The tiny ac vents blast a tube shot of air vs the older better broadcasting vents in my 2010. Not even worth changing trucks at all especially at these insane prices.

Whoops forgot to mention the phone and or tablet shelf in center console is a nice idea

Average 11.2mpg. LOL. That's acceptable if you have been pulling an RV. Are they still planning on putting a diesel in it? That's what it really needs. I wouldn't touch the V8 gasser.

Why would anyone buy a Thundra when it is years behind the big 3 .Stop being cheap Toyota . Get you wallet out Toyota and spend some cash on a 100% new Truck.

The chrome grill is way too big they need it to be less wide and get that chrome portion that is on the hood off. The hood raise is nice. The interior is a Ford rip off that I don't like. The center console is now a big empty pit compared to mine. I love my dual glove boxes. The rear seats on the crewmax were better with the 2nd gen when they could recline. I like the new dash though. As far as powertrain changes go the 5.7L iforce needs to change the way I said a long time back while being attacked by hemi lol and a georgec http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/07/2014-toyota-tundra-first-drive/comments/page/2/. I suggested VVT-ie, D4s which would allow a higher compression ratio for more power and better FE. This is now found on the Lexus RC F which added Atkinson-cycle which I am pretty sure won't work on the Tundra's VVT-i http://blog.caranddriver.com/toyota-introduces-high-efficiency-engines-plans-up-to-14-variants/. An 8-speed auto with a lower 1st and 2nd gear would help Tundra more than anybody else as they could get rid of the Hwy FE killing 4.30 axle ratio. If you apply the powertrain technology in the Lexus RC F http://blog.caranddriver.com/2015-lexus-rc-f-follows-up-on-remote-touch-interface-introduces-all-electric-cam-phasing-2014-detroit-auto-show/ to the 3ur (5.7) the Tundra could probably see 14-15 city and 19-20 highway before weight reduction which is vastly needed as it is the heaviest truck in the segment. A high strength steel fully boxed rolled form frame would greatly aid in that as well. With solid engineering 15/21 is very much achievable. Now would they do all of that I wouldn't bet on it as it may be cheaper to source a best in class lb ft engine from Cummins and drop the 5.7 all together which I hope they don't do but who knows for sure what Toyota will really do.

Now with all of that said Toyota has bean counters that keep the Tundra in the black. They will give the engineers and project managers but so much money to make changes as needed and chassis and powertrain changes cost the most to engineer and certify.

As far as the OHV vs. OHC thing goes the OHV is cheaper which allows for more FE technology like start/stop, direct injection and cylinder deactivation to be added to cheaper vehicles under 60K. OHV will also allow for more displacement that for FE reasons OHC companies can't come close to which means more power and better FE for the OHV guys. The example GM's EcoTec 6.2L and Ford 5.0L have the same FE numbers but GM has way more power. In this world of tighter FE the OHV will win because it allows the most tech to be added to the largest displacements.

@AD, agree except regarding pushrods.

It's a simple matter in my opinion--32 valves vs 16 equals twice as many valves, twice as many holes to drill, 2 x number of retainers, valve springs, 2 x the possible number of leaky valves, burnt valves, worn valve seals, etc.

Simple is the word. If you want to build a V8 that can live all day at 8000 rpm, I'd probably go to the DOHC motor.

After years of puzzling over this I've settled on the pushrod V8 in half ton trucks. It's just the way to go. Evidently Detroit thinks the same way.

looks like my 04 f150 fx4 toyota just copies fords ........

Toyota wants more people to think Tundra?

They could start by not building the ugliest, most expensive truck in the segment for the last 15 years.

All of this means nothing because its still a 1/2 ton truck build on a tacoma sized frame.

I agree with it looking "orange" and "cartoonish". Dissapointing, not truly competing and having egregious fuel economy describe it well. Being for the foreign-brand buyer who just wants to say he bought a Toyota sums it up.

I would agree that with this latest update, the truck is falling further and further behind the pack of leaders. That being said, I also recently saw a study of used truck values and the Toyota retained something like 80% after 3 years and was the leader in retained value from new. The big three were significantly less valuable...even the market sales leader, Ford. Why is this? Is it because the quality of Toyotas is legendary even in the face of massive recalls and cover ups? I don't completely understand it if someone wants to illuminate this for me please.

They need the brake controller option. My truck has it and it works better than any aftermarket one I've used.

The 5.0 V8 and 3.5 Ecoboot V6 TT are both DOHC, the volume engines. With the 6.2 going bye bye, only GM and Ram are stick with the OHV pushrod engines.

For towing, I like the 5.7 iForce, I'd put it up there with the old 8.1 big blocks. The 5.7 iForce doesn't rev up real high when towing, unlike the 6.0 and 6.2 (2500HD and 1500) GM trucks I've used. They have to rev to 4,800+ RPMS to keep up speed with any significant amount of weight behind them.

This thing looks dreadful.

The only thing the 5.7 will match the 8.1 for is crappy fuel economy. The 8.1 was used in Class A RVs.

Lipstick on a pig....it's still a pig.

The problem with this truck is the big fat footprint in the passenger's footwell. It's too pretty and won't stay that way for very long.


There is a simple straight forward reason why Tundra continues to kill both the F150 and Silverado on growth rates; it is the QDR and truck owners and buyers know it.

Unless Ford and GM can step up to the plate, then their rates will continue to fall.

RAM has also followed Tundra’s lead by addressing their transmission problem with a whole new design from a new supplier; still too early to tell if the RAM’s QDR will hold up like Tundra’s.


Randy, the F-150 is maintaining its impressive market share. It's not declining like you said. The Tundra is probably gaining a little because it has a new model. The F150 is old and is still hanging on! Just wait till the 2015 F150 comes out and it will make increases. GM is in trouble because it is in decline WITH a new model introduction. But it's Ram that seems to be taking that increase.

@Alex comment makes sense; I doubt you've ever towed anything heavier than a few ATVS. Towing with any SBC is miserable to say the least. There’s a reason why every GM fan boy always says D-max this, D-max that, it's because the GM gassers are a complete joke for towing, even with the max tow package (3.73 gears on 1500 and 4.10 on HDs).

Ford is the really only contender in the big 3 for 1/2 gas job towing. The Ram doesn’t have the capacity, and the GM trucks have engines with power bands that belong in Camaros and Corvettes. Making max torque in the high RPM band equals a dog down low. Ford knows how to make truck engines; you can keep those GM gas jobs that tow in 2nd gear up a hill screaming at 5,600 RPMS with any decent load behind them.

Our farm truck; 07 6.0 2500HD (4.10 gears) gets 7 MPGS towing a 9,000 pound trailer, my 11 5.7 Tundra (4.30 gears) gets 10 MPGS consistently towing the same load. Main difference is my Tundra will stay under 4,500 RPMS, versus the 6.0 2500HD is pushing 5,500 RPMS up the hills.

Toyota is such a try-hard company. They want to look American so bad it hurts.

Toyota and Siruis XM Radio both screwed me and will NEVER win me back no matter what they do. I wouldn't care if they were giving Tundra's away for free!
Toyota has lost favor with the consumer with the throttle pedal issue and rusting Tacoma's plus all the recalls and fines with serious safety related issues.
When I owned a Tacoma the Toyota Dealer would charge me $110 for a service, my F-150 costs $35 and it takes 7 qts of oil and they even top off my windshield washer tank that Toyota never did!
Little things mean a lot

@John, nice try but you don't know what I have towed, you obviously need to lie to yourself to make your story better. I'm extremely far from being a GM fanboy, I very rarely even say good things about them, but I would take their Gen 5 6.2 over the Tundra, any day of any week. I would also take the EcoBoost V6 over the GM 6.2. I would likely take the next Titan 5.0 Cummins over that. I would take any 3/4 ton or 1 ton diesel above that. Anyway, that should give you an idea of how far down my priority list the Toyota 5.7 gasser is.

As a former Toyota truck and current Sienna owner.
This 1794 Tundra is a flop.
The powertrain is stout but mpg's are bottom shelf.
There is nothing class-leading (aside from resale value) or innovative about the truck. Toyota invested billion in the Tundra. They are milking this investment for all its worth before spending $100's millions more to modernize the powertrain and improve mpg's. If they are smart the put the 5.0 Cummins in along with a strong 8spd Aisin transmission.
Toyota has lost its mojo and "kaizen" is just a forgotten lore.
They will rebound once the bean-counters open the R&D wallets.

I like the new Tundra's appearance of all the US pickups. I don't like the engine choices.

I'm wanting to see what Nissan has done with the next Titan.

The Tundra would be appealing if it had a decent diesel in it. But we will have to wait until the Cummins comes out.

By then we will hopefully see the Nissan. If the Nissan is a better truck than the Tundra it would make a good vehicle for where I live and the type of work I'm using my current pickup for.

The only skepticism I have would be the durability of these vehicles.

Lou stated that where he lives pickups are only good for a year or two. We have similar conditions up here in the Top End.

This is where the Toyota Landcruiser pickups and Nissan Patrol pickups shine. They can last for years being pounded.

Bed size = FAIL
Price = FAIL
Redesign = FAIL

Ford, Ram, and GM couldn't be happier. Quality may be the best, but Toyota time and again refuses to make needed improvements and options available on their vehicles. Marketing new vehicles without items that were standard the prior year leads to disillusionment, sending buyers elsewhere.

TRX4tom-Don't those stinking rams come from mexico??

I don't like the front of this truck. Looks like it was designed by a student. It is a melange of other pickups front. It does not have its own personality. The bumpers are also of poor design and the mix of plastic and metal fails to provide a rough image.
It is sad because the track is a good machine. It is just the look the lag behind the American trucks.

" It's a truck for Toyota loyalists that will refuse to shop for a better truck in Ford, GM, or RAM."

Posted by: RamTruckGuy | Apr 16, 2014 8:38:08 AM

No question. It's just above Nissan and both are bottom feeders.

"The biggest ripoff is the chrome clad wheels that all manufacturers are offering. They are nothing but plastic wheel covers. Ram wanted $400 dollars for these on my Big Horn. I said no thanks and kept the painted real aluminium wheels. I bet they will look like crap in 5-7 years."

Posted by: fredtheman | Apr 16, 2014 8:39:59 AM


My 03 Ram has chrome clad wheels. They still look great. Keep them waxed along with the paint. Truck is never garaged. Under the chrome clad is an aluminum rim. They can be polished if you remove the clad. Truck is 10 1/2 years. with 93,000 miles 4x4 off road it.

So what exactly is Toyota trying to prove with this truck. Do they even think that the Tundra is remotely relevant? Any one of the big three has put far more money into developing and testing their trucks so all things being equal, the Tundra is going to be the runt of the litter just by the nature of the game.

wow is this site just chocked FULL of know it alls that really dont know a thing. i dont have enough time in my day to disprove all the idiotic statements on this hatefully setup add...... clearly Mark Williams nor half of the commenters have even looked at one up close let alone done ANYTHING with one. This site and the majority of the commenters here are uneducated on the inner workings of current pickups..... IF you knew half of what you thought you knew you would laugh at yourselves!!!! the Tundra is up about 20% over last year at this point with a plant running at full capacity unable to keep up. Everyone elses sales are flat except ram and ALL of them have near 10,000 on the hood for rebates to keep them moving meanwhile the tundra has a 500 rebate on the double cab and 1000 on a crew max...... Apparently the public who buys them like them a lot more than you haters do and the hold their value WAY better. Hate on fools

Mark Williams is wrong on one point; the Tundra is showing up in "real work" environments such as farms and construction crews. I see one in central Pennsylvania in particular carrying a 150-gallon fuel tank with pump for refueling heavy equipment and the owner says it rides better than any previous truck he's owned for that purpose. Crew Max cab.

I think the Tundra is an impressive truck. However, I just don't buy the 1794 mantra. The Tundra became relevant in 2007, so creating a package that harkens back to a time not relevant to the company seems like cartoon marketing. This is unfortunate because the sum of the parts used are great but the 1794 gimmick is not. I've noticed Toyota has a very hard time keeping a successful model fresh. Hopefully a new Tundra will bring some of the engineering excellence Toyota is known for throughout the world. Recently traveled to Africa, and drove some brilliant hybrid's and diesels, that should, but won't, make it state side. Toyota is better than the watered down products we drive.

I agree with most of the comments about the 2014 Tundra. The drivetrane is no 8 yrs old and. This being said it is still better then the offerings from from and Chevy. I am passing the tundra this year and will be looking at a RAM. I can care less about the quality of the interior . I don't wash my vehicles or trade them in, I do my own work post warranty and I run them till they are dead Fuel cost is my largest issue and as much as I like the reliability of the toyota it is just too expensive to run . The Ram seems to have both dependability and fuel efficiency so. If you want 10 year old technology which is dependable (it better be after 10 years) then go toyota . Brand loyality can only be streached so far and for me it has reached its breaking point. Later toyota....

@SAS, the Ram is a great truck, are you considering the EcoDiesel?

The comments to this entry are closed.