Gambony, Jim wrote:
>
> I'll support what Shawn says with some personal obervations about the Haynes
> manuals.
> Both Haynes and Bentley seem to be good for the "replacement is the reverse
> of the removal process" type of poor instructions.
>From the view of someone who produces manuals, there are some reasons
for doing this. Generally, the way things come apart are the way things
have to go back together. For larger items, such as engines, which have
specific checks and procedures in the assembly process, you do find
disassembly and reassembly instructions, generally.
For smaller items requiring remounting, rather than repair in the
process of assembly, it makes economic sense to say "replacement is the
reverse...." Our maintenance manuals ordinarily run 1200-1400 pages, and
to write out the instructions for assembly not only would take much more
time, but would add to printing costs significantly, as much as 60-65%
because of the additional pages required. Figure the same thing for a
commercially published manual, and your costs to purchase go up
significantly.
Cheers.
|