SKU: 84264873447

yourdog tibetaanse spani l volwassen

$1620.45 $1800.50
Save 10%
No.2 Bestseller on grupomusso.com.br >

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 9 - Jul 14

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

yourdog tibetaanse spani l volwassenYourdog Tibetaanse spanil zorgt voor de holistische gezondheid en het welzijn van uw hond. Alle Yourdog varianten bevatten volledig buffel en kip. Wij combineren dit met zorgvuldig geselecteerde groenten, fruit en kruiden om zo te komen tot de perfecte voeding voor jouw Tibetaanse spanil. Waarom Yourdog Tibetaanse spanil Rijk aan buffel en gevogelte Speciaal gemaakt voor de Tibetaanse spanil Bevat Echinacea, Fenegriek en Cranberry Bevordert een

Yourdog Tibetaanse spaniël zorgt voor de holistische gezondheid en het welzijn van uw hond. Alle Yourdog varianten bevatten volledig buffel en kip. Wij combineren dit met zorgvuldig geselecteerde groenten, fruit en kruiden om zo te komen tot de perfecte voeding voor jouw Tibetaanse spaniël.

Waarom Yourdog Tibetaanse spaniël

  • Rijk aan buffel en gevogelte
  • Speciaal gemaakt voor de Tibetaanse spaniël
  • Bevat Echinacea, Fenegriek en Cranberry
  • Bevordert een gezonde, samengestelde vacht
  • Zorg voor een gezonde darmflora
  • Vrij van kunstmatige geur-, kleur- of smaakstoffen
  • Ook geschikt voor de gevoelige Tibetaanse spaniël

Onze ingrediënten

Voor het maken van ons voer wordt er voor een 12 kg-zak 10,6 kg vlees ingedroogd, zodat dit beter te verwerken is in onze brok. Met de juiste hoeveelheid groente, fruit en kruiden is Yourdog een gezonde, voedzame keuze voor de hond.

Buffel

Bij Yourdog gebruiken wij vlees van vrij volwassene en gras gevoerde buffels. Buffelvlees staat bekend om zijn romige, frisse smaak en rijke kleur en zit vol met vitamines en mineralen. Met een lager cholesterol- en vetgehalte en minder calorieën zit dit malse vlees bomvol gezondheidsvoordelen.

Gevogelte

Bij Yourdog maken wij gebruik van eend, kip en kalkoen welke samen zorgen voor een heerlijke smaak en aroma van de brok. De hoog verticale eiwitten in het gevogelte zorgen voor een goede spieropbouw en zijn rijk aan vitamines en mineralen.

Groente

Om de hond te voorzien van extra waardevolle toevoer zijn supergezonde groenten aan ons voer toegevoegd. Zo zijn groenten niet alleen voedzaam, maar hebben ze ook nog andere gezonde eigenschappen. De ruwe vezel in groenten is goed voor de darmen en kan onder andere bijdragen aan de spijsvertering.

Fruit

Wij voegen een unieke combinatie van fruit toe aan Yourdog toe, waardoor de hond alle essentiële, natuurlijke antioxidanten binnen krijgt. Zo kan het fruit goed zijn voor het immuunsysteem van de hond, maar het kan ook bijdragen aan een frisse adem of het behouden van een gezonde spijsvertering. Deze natuurlijke ingrediënten voor de gezondheid van de hond.

Kruiden

De gezonde kruiden die ons voer verrijken zijn afkomstig van planten uit Europa. Het gebruik van onder andere kruiden, wortels, bloemen, planten en wieren vindt zijn oorsprong al duizenden jaren terug. Deze ingrediënten ondersteunen de natuurlijke processen in het lichaam van de hond, zoals de spijsvertering. Ieder ingrediënt dat wij aan ons hondenvoer toevoegen is met zorg geselecteerd vanwege de positieve eigenschappen. Afhankelijk van de grootte van de hond, wordt het ras of de rasgroep ingrediënten extra onder de aandacht gebracht. Rasspecifieke klachten kunnen verminderd worden door het gebruik van kruiden, wortels, bloemen en planten.

Tibetaanse spaniël specifieke groente, kruiden en fruit

Wij hebben zorgvuldig de raseigenschappen van de Tibetaanse spaniël onderzocht. Ook hebben we onderzoek gedaan naar de eigenschappen van de FCI-ras sectie en de FCI-rasgroep waar de Tibetaanse spaniël toe behoort. Uit deze onderzoekers zijn, in overleg met mogelijke Nederlandse voedingsdeskundige, oorspronkelijk geselecteerd die de gezondheid en het welzijn van de Tibetaanse spaniël optimaal tien goede komen.

Zonnehoed

Echinacea komt uit de plantenfamilie asteraceae, die van nature uit het oosten van Noord-Amerika voorkomt. Aan een aantal planten uit deze familie worden medicinale eigenschappen werkzaam. Zo wordt de plant in verband veroorzaakt met het versterken van het immuunsysteem en infecties aan de luchtwegen.

Het is uit onderzoek gebleken dat echinacea een ontstekingsremmende werking kan hebben bij honden. Via bloedonderzoek is ook bewezen dat het een positief effect heeft op de gezondheid en weerstand van honden. Zo kunnen de verkoudheidsklachten zoals een druipneus en hoesten verminderen.

Bij Yourdog voegt we echinacea toe aan ons hondenvoer omdat dit een positieve bijdrage kan leveren aan het versterken van de weerstand van de hond en kan bijdragen aan de totale gezondheid.

Fenegriek

Fenegriek is net als de plant uit de vlinderbloemenfamilie. De plant wordt ook wel foenegriek of 'Grieks hooi' genoemd. Het komt oorspronkelijk uit Mesopotamië en was in de oudheid bekend in het Middellandse Zeegebied. Tegenwoordig wordt fenegriek ook geproduceerd in Centraal-Azië.

Fenegriek is rijk aan ijzer en koper. Fenegriek bevat saponine en coumarinen, waardoor het kan helpen bij aderproblemen. Verder heeft het ontstekingswerende eigenschappen (natuurlijke ontstekingsremmer) en overvloedig het de galproductie.

Fenegriek kan door ons aan het voer worden toegevoegd ter voorkoming van artritis, astma, huidproblemen. Ook de maag en darmen genieten van de positieve effecten van de toevoegingen van fenegriek en het ondersteunt een gezonde spijsvertering.

Cranberry

De cranberry is een plant uit de heidefamilie. Deze plant is in Nederland voornamelijk te vinden op de Waddeneilanden en zeer zelden in de rest van Nederland. Oorspronkelijk komt de plant uit Noord-Amerika en zou deze rond 1845 voor het eerst naar Nederland zijn gekomen.

Cranberries bevatten een unieke mix van inspirerende die een krachtige gezondheidsboost aan honden kan bieden. De besjes zijn onder andere rijk aan mineralen zoals kalium, die zorgt voor een gezond niveau van de vitale vloeistof in het lichaam. Ook zitten deze besjes vol met vitamine A, B en C en antioxidanten om het immuunsysteem te ondersteunen. Vitamine C maakt de urine zuurder en zorgt ervoor dat het milieu in de blaas onaantrekkelijker wordt voor bacteriën. Ook kan het toevoegen van cranberry een pijnverlichtende en ontstekingsremmende werking hebben. De gezonde vezels in veenbessen hebben een gezonde invloed op de spijsvertering en zorgen voor een langer vol gevoel.

Cranberry wordt toegevoegd aan ons hondenvoer omdat dit een positieve bijdrage zou kunnen leveren aan het voorkomen van rasspecifieke klachten in relatie tot onder andere de spijsvertering, huid, gewrichten, botten en zenuwfuncties.

Pup, volwassen of senior?

Om je te helpen bij het maken van de juiste keuze tussen onze varianten Tibetaanse spaniël hondenvoer kun je gebruik maken van de volgende richtlijnen. Is jouw Tibetaanse spaniël jonger dan 11 maanden, kies dan voor de Puppy-variant. Voor een Tibetaanse spaniël ouder dan 7 jaar adviseren wij de Yourdog Tibetaanse spaniël senior. Is jouw hond ouder dan 11 maanden en jonger dan 7 jaar, dan kun je de volwassen variant kiezen.

Smaakelijkheidsgarantie

Wij zijn betrouwbaar van de kwaliteit van onze voeding. Daarom geven wij op alle Yourdog verpakkingen een smakelijkheidsgarantie. Lijkt Tibetaanse jouw spaniël zijn Yourdog hondenvoer toch niet lekker te vinden, neem dan contact met ons op. Wij helpen je bij het analyseren van de problemen. Komen we er niet samen uit dan krijg je van ons het aankoopbedrag terug.

Voedingsadvies

Lichaamsgewicht (kg) Dagelijkse hoeveelheid (g)
1 - 5 35 - 115
5 - 10 115 - 190
10 - 20 190 - 315

Overstapadvies

Stap je over op Yourdog vanaf een ander voermerk dan adviseren wij de volgende stappen te volgen. Voor de eerste stap voer je 25% Yourdog en 75% van het oude hondenvoer. De hond kan hier gedurende twee dagen aan wennen. Vervolgens voer je 50% Yourdog en 50% van het oude hondenvoer. Het is belangrijk dat je de hond ook hier weer twee of drie dagen aan laat gewend. Daarna meng je 75% Yourdog en 25% van het oude hondenvoer. De hond is nu bijna helemaal voorbij op Yourdog. Doe dit gedurende 2 dagen. Naar eigen inzicht kun je hierna 100% Yourdog Tibetaanse spaniël hondenvoer gaan voeren.

Bewaaradvies

Na het openen van de Yourdog-verpakking wordt de voeding opgenomen aan zuurstof, vocht en licht, wat de duurzame en smaak kan verminderen. Daarom is het belangrijk dat de voeding na het openen van de zak op een goede manier te bewaren is, bij voorkeur in een luchtdichte bewaardoos of -ton op een droge, koele en donkere plaats. Het beste is om de voeding niet los te laten in de ton te doen, maar deze met de hele zak, die je weer zo goed mogelijk dichtmaakt, in de ton te zetten.

Samenstelling

Maïs, gedroogde kip (23%), erwten, gedroogde buffel (3,5%), gevogeltevet, cholinechloride, glucosamine, chondroïtine, groentemix (met oa tomaat), fruitmix (met oa cranberry), kruidenmix (met oa echinacea, fenegriek)

Analytische bestandsdelen

Ruw eiwit 26%, ruw vet 8%, ruw celstof 4%, ruw als 6,1%, Calcium 1,4%, Fosfor 1,1%

Voedingswaarden

Vitamine A 20.000 IE (E672), vitamine D3 1.400 IE (E671), vitamine E als all rac-alpha-tocopherylacetat (3a700) 500 mg, E1 Fe als ijzer(II)sulfaat, monohydraat: 50 mg, E2 I als calciumjodaat, watervrij:1,5 mg, E4 Cu als koper(II)sulfaat, pentahydraat: 5,0 mg, E5 Mn als mangaan(II)oxide: 35 mg, E6 Zn als zinkoxide: 65 mg, E8 Se als natriumseleniet: 0,2 mg.



1-2
Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 84264873447

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.3 ★★★★★
Based on 1161 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
A
[email protected]
Bozeman, US
★★★★★ 3
Good to excellent content - terrible publishing policy
Format: Hardcover
Lewis (Not "Flewis") wrote a decent text a number of years ago. It was then expanded to a companion volume (Analytical Sedimentology) with another author. The two nicely complement each other but the mind boggles at a price of almost $100 per each. The publisher has clearly made little effort to control the cost. Redundancy between the two volumes is excessive, hard cover rather than soft is used and, indeed, both could easily have been combined in one less pricey volume. A valuable resource to students and professionals has therefore been compromised by publisher, author or both due to ignorance, greed or stupidity. A terrible shame!
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on January 5, 1998
J
Verified Purchase
JMB1014
Draper, US
★★★★★ 5
An Excellent Introduction to Legal and Constitutional Reasoning
Format: Hardcover
This is an excellent introductory volume for people who feel confused by the debate over "original intent" versus a "living Constitution." David A. Strauss is a law professor at the University of Chicago. His book is a quick read (139 pages), with no notes, bibliography or other impedimenta - just an index. It's a very lucid explanation of legal reasoning and how the Supreme Court has followed this basic process over time. Hence the "living constitution" is really just an instance of the English common law tradition functioning normally. This book will teach many Americans how legal reasoning actually operates in practice. It is a common-sensical and conservative process that seeks at once to promote predictability and fairness. By and large, it has worked well. The phrase "living Constitution" has been denigrated by people who seek to turn back the calendar to a day when more "traditional" values were imposed by law. In so doing, they have invoked an historical fiction, the "original intent" of the framers of the Constitution. The myriad problems arising from this effort, if not its disingenuousness, have been discussed with insight and erudition by such excellent minds as Jack Rakove ("Original Meanings")and Akhil Reed Amar ("The Bill of Rights," and "The American Constitution: A Biography"), to name just two. The real point of this book, I think, is to explain basic legal reasoning to a mass audience. This does a great service. It also shows how naturally the common law evolves, how it tends to restrain judicial activism and yet to permit flexibility as times and circumstances change. As Dean Roscoe Pound of the Harvard Law School put it in his book, "The Spirit of the Common Law," the common law is "essentially a mode of judicial and juristic thinking, a mode of treating legal problems rather than a fixed body of definite rules...." This is a critical distinction. Some so-called conservatives insist that judges must simply apply the law like automatons, as if it were a "fixed body of definite rules." They then seek to enlist the founding fathers in declaring what those rules are, or how definite they must be. But as Dean Pound and centuries of legal history demonstrate, this notion is far removed from the truth, and remote from any useful notion of adjudication. All Anglophone law schools, lawyers and judges are engaged in the process Dean Pound discusses. The common law tradition arose in England over the course of centuries. We imported it to this country in part because it was workable and practical, and because it was brilliantly and systematically expounded by Chief Justice Edward Coke in the 17th century and by Lord William Blackstone shortly before the American Revolution. No one would suggest that the common law tradition means the law is the captive of judges' subjective whims. Such an assertion would have sounded ludicrous to the English as well as to the founders. But as Strauss - and volumes of legal history - unsurprisingly demonstrate, the common law tradition is the key to constitutional interpretation. The common law is an inherently conservative instrument. It evolves incrementally. Those who complain about the "living Constitution" argue that judges merely rule according to their subjective prejudices. They contend that it is the legislative branch that should be charged with interpreting the Constitution. Of course, all three branches of government must interpret the Constitution from time to time. But the legislative branch should not have the last word in determining whether its own enactments meet constitutional scrutiny: To borrow from Chief Justice Coke, no one (including the legislature) may be the judge of his own cause. The function of determining whether legislation conforms to the Constitution has been and still is wisely confided to the courts, which by virtue of centuries of practice (as reflected in published opinions) have substantial expertise in the area and are independent. One also hears complaints that judges are insulated from reality. But courts are not insulated - they are independent. And they are independent precisely so they are not subject to being influenced by lobbyists or terrified by a challenger in a primary election. To show how the common law works, Strauss discusses the evolution of constitutional thought in relation to two major issues: freedom of speech and segregation in public schools. He explains how the "clear and present danger" test in freedom of speech cases evolved, implicating not just such considerations as the threat of imminent harm, but also that some kinds of speech have lower societal value (libel, obscenity, fighting words), while other kinds of speech have more societal value (great literature, political speech). Strauss goes on to discuss how Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was far less a radical overturning of an entrenched precedent, Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), than a logical step in the development of the law. In so doing, he uses an example from the law of torts, where customers injured by dangerous products originally were barred from suing the manufacturer unless they had a contractual relationship with it. At first, the fact that a product was inherently dangerous overcame the requirement of a contractual relationship. As it became harder to draw a line between ordinary products and those that were inherently dangerous, however, the old requirement of a contractual relationship was found to have outworn its purpose and customers were permitted to sue the manufacturer who had created a foreseeable risk of harm. Thus, in products liability cases, as in racial equality cases, the law evolved to meet the new demands posed by changed circumstances. Strauss shows the development of the law by discussing cases on racial equality decided after Plessy that gradually undercut the Plessy decision until it was no longer tenable. Strauss does what law professors do every day: teach the law by showing how it evolved. His explanation, however, is so concise and clear that it makes the discussion seem not just sensible but compelling. Thus we see that the law works. As Strauss points out, we never wrangle over some constitutional issues because they are cut and dried (you have to be 30 years old to be a senator) or because certainty is required (January 20 is the day the new president takes office, no matter how unstable the current domestic or world situation). Other provisions require more effort to interpret, but this is because the founders brilliantly provided that some matters could be spelled out specifically in advance, while others would have to be expressed in more general terms, which could be adjusted to changing needs and times (e.g., the "necessary and proper" clause in Article I, Sec. 8). Interestingly, Strauss does not consider amendments to the Constitution to be part of what makes it a living document, since the amendment process is so onerous, slow, and seldom used. He points out how some amendments merely ratified the status quo, or served to clean up outliers, resolved technical issues, or were ahead of their time. As he offers these judgments, which seem balanced and reasonable, he also explains some of the less familiar amendments in a way that will have readers raising their eyebrows and saying "Oh, so that's where that came from." At the outset of the book, Strauss sets out three objections to originalism: That it is often, as a practical matter, impossible even for professional historians to discover what the intentions were of various founders with respect to matters discussed in the Constitution. That even if an intent of the founders could be discovered, it would pertain to the understanding they had about their world: how does one go about trying to fit that understanding to our world? That as Thomas Jefferson pointed out, one generation is to another as one sovereign nation is to another. The world belongs to the living. The notions of people long dead cannot bind us in the present or future. Strauss correctly observes that the third of these objections is by itself fatal to originalism. The founders were not so impressed with themselves that they felt their "intentions" should be forever imposed on posterity. Had they been dedicated to such a dubious project, they would surely have done a better job of documenting their debates and compromises during the Philadelphia convention. But little remains of those deliberations aside from the notes kept by James Madison. The Constitution, moreover, reflects their understanding that the future could not be shackled forever to the time in which they lived. They realized that the slave trade, for example, would prove intolerable and therefore provided that it could be abolished by at least 1808. So was their "original intent" to permit the slave trade, or was it that the slave trade should be abolished? And what does this say, if anything, about their intentions toward the institution of slavery - a word that did not even appear in the Constitution until the Thirteenth Amendment was adopted in 1865? Most damning of all to the originalist position is what Thomas Jefferson said on the subject. In a letter dated July 12, 1816, to Samuel Kercheval, Jefferson wrote "Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well; I belonged to it, and labored with it. It deserved well of its country. It was very like the present, but without the experience of the present; and forty years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading; and this they would say themselves, were they to rise from the dead. I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." He added, "Let us follow no such examples nor weakly believe that one generation is not as capable as another of taking care of itself, and of ordering its own affairs." He even called for revision of the constitution at stated periods. While originalists would love to claim Jefferson as one of their own, his words - and indeed his whole life - prove that he was completely at odds with their approach. Men like Jefferson and Franklin, who were devotees of science, were fascinated by the progress men could make in trying to understand and improve their lives. Jefferson was an eager student of nature and did considerable experimentation with crops on his plantation. He famously wrote his "Notes on the State of Virginia" to refute the widely read claims of the French naturalist Buffon about the supposedly weak, degenerate, and insipid life forms to be found in the New World. The idea that such men, who were committed to the growth of knowledge, would seek to confine all future generations to the limited understanding they possessed of the universe in 1787, is worse than laughable. It can only be explained by the polemical purposes of those whose arguments for a regressive social order are so feeble that they have to seek refuge behind an imaginary "original intent" that they erect - as if the founders wanted their limited knowledge and often unarticulated, conflicting, or ambivalent intentions to restrict the great national experiment forever. Given the explicit language of Thomas Jefferson, quoted above, it is apparent that "originalism" actually belies and defies the express intent of Jefferson, one of the most eminent of the founders. It seems paradoxical but it was his original intent that his original intent should not govern future generations! Original intent also appears anomalously restrictive when one considers that the founders never contemplated the existence of an Air Force, though they expressly provided for the Army and the Navy. And ask an originalist what the original intent was with respect to the Second Amendment's use of the term "arms." The founders had no concept of assault rifles or machine guns, let alone nerve gas, laser-guided bombs, predator drones, or nuclear weapons. How do we impose an intention on them to assert what they could not have foreseen, namely, that ordinary householders in the 21st century should have a personal, constitutional right to be able to obliterate a small army in a matter of seconds, based on the founders' notions about the 18th century saber, musket or pistol? Likewise, the Eleventh Amendment says nothing to prohibit a person from suing her own state - just other states. Yet even "textualists" read an unwritten provision into the Eleventh Amendment because it suits their view of how "sovereign" the states should be. When given this kind of a taste of their own medicine, originalists collapse in helpless sputtering and exasperation. Exposed to Strauss' very sensible discussion, the concerns of originalists reflect opportunism and disingenuousness. After all, we should not expect lawyers and judges to become armchair historians, especially under the time pressures of litigation and in the face of hotly contested issues. We should not pretend the founders had some monolithic intent, least of all with respect to matters of which they had no concept. And as Jefferson pointed out, the relationship of one generation to another is like that of one sovereign nation to another: we cannot expect to bind future generations by the intentions of people who are long since dead. In short, there will always be those who resist change and those who welcome it. If you really want to see "judicial activism" at work, you will not find much of it in the common law tradition. A far better example is the recent decision - by the so-called conservatives on the Supreme Court - in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 18, 2010
B
Verified Purchase
Benjamin Douglass
Carnegie, US
★★★★★ 5
An Excellent Read
Format: Kindle
The author talks about our constitution as a "living document" and expertly draws the distinction between this and the originalist interpretation as a "dead document."
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 5, 2018
F
Verified Purchase
Frederick S. Goethel
Louisville, US
★★★★★ 4
The Constitution: A Living or Static Document
Format: Hardcover
There has been a debate over the past several decades on whether the US Constitution is a living document that should be interpreted according to current mores and standards or whether it is a static document that should be interpreted using only the meaning found in the original wording of the document. The author, in this book, makes the case that the Constitution is, in fact, a living document that should be interpreted by modern standards and by using principles of common law. There are examples given that, quite frankly, are very persuasive. For instance, if the Constitution were interpreted using original language, we would not have the freedom of speech that we now enjoy. A careful reading of the First Amendment will show that only Congress was prohibited from making laws that abridged free speech. There were no constraints on the states or on other governmental bodies. Whether or not you agree with the author on how the Constitution should be interpreted, this book will make for some though provoking reading and interesting discussion. The book was well written, fairly easy to understand and should be read by all who are concerned about where the Supreme Court is now and where it is headed.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 23, 2010
G
Verified Purchase
garynini
Boise, US
★★★★★ 5
Clear, cogent, and illuminating
Format: Kindle
Clear, cogent, and illuminating explanation of the difference between two approaches to interpreting the Constitution: originalism and the Living Constitution
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 18, 2015

recommand products

White/Navy Seat Cover 3 Ribs - KTM ENDURO 690 R (2008-2019)
117.00
Black Seat Cover - HUSQVARNA TC 50 (2017-2023)
58.00
White Seat Cover 3 Ribs - KTM SX 300 (2023-2023)
117.00
White Seat Cover 3 Ribs - KTM EXC 250 TPI (2017-2024)
117.00
Navy Seat Cover - HUSQVARNA FX 350 (2017-2023)
70.00