Haynes manual instructions

Any places should know about?


__________________
Note: To reply, replace the word 'spam' embedded in return address with 'mail'.
N37.3 W122.0

 

Barry S. <> sprach im

What, you *don't know*?? You must be pretty stupid, Daniel Stern says so.

 

Nope, Tegger, I said YOU are acting stupid. As far as I know, Barry isn't.

 

Hemmings Motor News is cram packed with auto service literature vendors.

 

This is what my experience has been with haynes and chiltons manuals.
Almost always wrong, for some other car, some other model year, etc.
No specific info. The factory manuals, even with the expense pay for
themselves with a couple repairs.

 

Agreed. I have a Chilton for Dodge trucks and parts of it are taken word
for word from the FSM.

 

I've been buying Haynes manuals for twenty years, and have had
them for Toyotas (pickup, Supra), a Honda Accord, and a Mercedes.
I can't recall every having a significant complaint about any of
them. Maybe they've gone downhill in recent years.



Geoff

 

I think it's just some manuals cover too much. The Full Size GM one I
had covered Buick, Pontiac, Olds from 1970-1990. Sure, the basic
suspension design didn't change a lot in 20 years, but the fuel system
sure did. (manual choke -> fuel injection.) You just can't cover both
Chevy V8's (small and big block), the Pontiac V8 and an Olds V8 in any
detail in 50 pages.

Ray

 

I'll have to grab a copy..

I will take a Haynes manual over Chrysler's DEALER Tech Connect.. For
some reason, the full factory manuals and PDF versions on CD-ROM
aren't available online.. So the manual may give you a picture and say
remove the 5 screws in the diagram. The online service will give you
one line of text.. "Remove the 5 screws from the panel" And no
picture.. Sometimes there is a picture buried in one of the other
parts sections, but its sometimes not hyperlinked.

__________________
Note: To reply, replace the word 'spam' embedded in return address with 'mail'.
N37.3 W122.0

 

That would be the main problem I've seen for both Chiltons and Haynes -
Too many vehicles per book. I've got a Chiltons AND a Haynes that KINDA
cover my Mazda, along with the full FSM set specific to year/model. The
Chiltons covers (or perhaps I should say "tries to cover"?) 6 models and
14 years, 2.0 and 2.3 liter four-cylinder recips, and two-rotor Wankels.
IN ONE VOLUME! The Haynes? Not *QUITE* as bad: 4 models, 8 years, and
only looks closely at the 2.0 liter recip (with a notation that the 2.3
is "similar in most respects") and the two-rotor Wankel. Neither one of
them is anywhere near as in-depth as I prefer my service information to
be, glossing over WAY too many things (or totally ignoring them, like
the A/C, and a huge chunk of the electrical).

Of course, the FSM covers exactly one vehicle: The 1982 Mazda 626. And
it covers every assembly, part, bolt, screw, etc, and does it in
exhaustive detail - enough that even I wouldn't be *TOO* afraid to crack
open, ferinstance, the automatic tranny (if mine had one), and I'd
actually have a reasonable expectation of it working when I put it back
together.

 

The main problem I've found with the Haynes books is that they often show
detailed close-up photos of a certain part, but don't show enough of the
surrounding portion of the engine, brakes, etc. to actually locate that
part!

(One such example, a very close photo of the PCV valve, but the photo
doesn't show enough of the surrounding part of the engine to actually show
*where* that PCV valve is actually located.)

 

I have to agree. Haynes and Chilton are not detailed enough. Usually
the section I need doesn't go into detail enough. Nothing replaces the
factory service manuals. Whether it is GM, Chrysler, and Honda etc. If
I own the vehicle I buy the manual. The last one I bought for my
Cherokee Sport came from www.tenaflyjeepmoparparts.com it cost about
$100.00. Dwane Glenn the parts manager gives you 30% off list on all
parts. I say you will never be sorry from buying quality, buy it right
the first time and never buy it again. Dave On Fri, 12 Nov 2004

 

||
||Except, after I had learned my lesson years earlier on aftermarket
||manuals, a few months after I bought my daughter a used car, the very
||first opportunity that came up for diagnosis and repair of an electrical
||problem, in a weak moment, I went down the street and sprung for a whole
||$13 for a Haynes manual. Due to a visibly hidden fuse that was not
||shown in the "TYPICAL" schematics of the Haynes, I ended up replacing a
||perfectly good factory alternator when all that was wrong was that the
||in-line fuse that the manual did not show had mechanically fractured.

With all due respect, that's just not good basic diagnostics. Every parts store
worth giving your business to has an alternator tester. A quick check would have
told you the problem was elsewhere. That's not excusing the omission, but there
is some shared responsibility here.
Haynes is advertised as a "Tuneup and repair *guide*". They do not pretend
to be a substitute for the FSM, but for the money they are a good alternative,
and the only company currently providing one. And yes, some Haynes books are
better than others.
Texas Parts Guy

 

see below

see below

My primary bone of contention is that "typical" schematics are used. I
make the analogy to using a map that shows hiways between New York and
Philadelphia to drive from Denver to LA. To sell someone such a map for
that purpose is fraudulent. There's no such thing as a schematic to be
used as a "guide". It either represents the circuits of interest and is
a useful troubleshooting too, or it is as worthless as that map. If
it's only a guide, then leave the schematics out, because putting them
in at all implies something that isn't delivered.

They do not pretend

You are correct about having it tested - in the attempt to keep my posts
short (which is a problem for me anyway), I just failed to mention that
- the fact is that I took it to two stores, and the standard adapters
they had with their alterantor test setups would not adapt to the
particular alternator (for the record it was on a '96 Mercury Mystique -
for some reason, the connectors are not typical of other Ford
alternators). The one store was honest about it - did their best to use
alligator clips to hook it up the best they knew how - they didn't seem
very confident in how to hook it up, and it failed the test - I took
that with a grain of salt. Went to a competitor who had the exact same
generic tester setup with the same standard adapters (that didn't fit
the alternator) - their guy faked it and simply told me it failed the
test. The problem turned out to be a mechanically fractured (not
thermally/electircally blown) MegaFuse™. An alternator is not going to
blow the same time a fuse happens to mechanically fracture.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

If I wasn't clear - that fuse was not part of or built into the
alternator - it was in the hot wire going from the battery tot he
alternator, and was hidden underneath the intake plenum.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

I agree 100% with Texas Parts Guy. Last year I did a Timingbelt,
Waterpump, AFT replacement project around this time using Haynes. I
also had a Chiltons. I found the illustrations are more clear in
Haynes. Chiltons has more descriptions. Also I was posting and getting
help from this news group. I will be buying a Hayens if I change my
car. It may not be the most detailed manual like the Shop Manuals, but
it helped me to save over $600 for a small investment of $12
(including shipping in eBay).

 

I tried to use a Haynes on an '87 Mazda for the timing belt. Guess what
- they had the illustrations and procedures for the wrong engine because
the engine for that model had been changed for that year from the
previous one and they didn't reflect that - was totally useless for that
procedure. The FSM would not have made that mistake because it is model
and year specific.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

||sams wrote:
||> I agree 100% with Texas Parts Guy. Last year I did a Timingbelt,
||> Waterpump, AFT replacement project around this time using Haynes. I
||> also had a Chiltons. I found the illustrations are more clear in
||> Haynes. Chiltons has more descriptions. Also I was posting and getting
||> help from this news group. I will be buying a Hayens if I change my
||> car. It may not be the most detailed manual like the Shop Manuals, but
||> it helped me to save over $600 for a small investment of $12
||> (including shipping in eBay).
||
||I tried to use a Haynes on an '87 Mazda for the timing belt. Guess what
||- they had the illustrations and procedures for the wrong engine because
||the engine for that model had been changed for that year from the
||previous one and they didn't reflect that - was totally useless for that
||procedure. The FSM would not have made that mistake because it is model
||and year specific.

Bill
I will notify Haynes not to expect your re-order.


Texas Parts Guy

 

Heh heh! You do that. 8^)

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

Nedavno Bill 2 pise:

| > >This should be included with every Haynes manual sold:
| > >http://u225.torque.net/haynes_instructions.html
| >
| > While they are not the best choice, they are not quite that bad.
|
| Actually yes they are. They are filled with so much incorrect,
| incomplete information that your money is better spent paying a couple
| bucks more for the factory service manual.

I have 1977 Puch Maxi, and was happy to find Haynes manual for it (from
1973) on amazon.com. Never even heard about Haynes until I joined this
group. I am completely disappointed with it as this seems to be a
"complete idiots guide" to disassemble and assemble it's engine. OK, not
quite, but I hoped for much more details.

I ordered directly from haynes.co.uk manual for both my Audi and BMW.
Hope they are better than this one from '73