When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
According to the seller, the '42 manual was used with supplements through 1948. Since the post-war models were largely warmed-over pre-war models, a single manual covering them is logical, and the seller, Faxon Auto Literature, has been around a long time.
There is nothing necessarily wrong with a reproduction manual. That's not the same as a CD. I bought a reproduction '67 Olds factory service manual to replace an original manual I had that was in tatters, and the repro is gorgeous.
Okay. I've seen reproduction manuals that were far less than "gorgeous," as have we all, and there is no way that you can tell from an eBay listing whether the manual is gorgeous or a blotchy multi-generation Xerox.
If you buy a factory manual, you will get a manual that is of original quality.
If you buy a reproduction, you will get a manual that is, by definition, and in accordance with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, less clear than an original, as there is no "super-quality" "prototype" manual available from which to copy.
Faxon Auto Literature is not a fly-by-night company. I doubt they would sell poor quality materials. Yes, factory originals are best, but every 1942 service manual is now 75 years old, which means 75-year-old paper, 75-year-old bindings, loose pages, torn pages, grease-stained pages, and more. None of them are new.
I'm not saying that reproduction manuals are better. I'm just saying that they shouldn't automatically be discounted just because they're reproductions, and they have some advantages, such as new paper and new bindings.
Last edited by jaunty75; Mar 12, 2017 at 03:42 PM.
I'm not saying that reproduction manuals are (necessarily) worse.
I'm just saying that we see many examples on this board of ones that are, and it is difficult to have complete confidence in a reproduction manual's quality until you have it in your hands (and, to be overly precise, until you have it in your hands next to an original copy, so that you can compare the quality, especially of the halftone work).
The OP will follow his own preferences in making a decision.
Another disadvantage of original manuals I've experienced with several I've owned is that they just don't hold up with use. Cracked bindings with pages coming loose is the most common problem. Repeated opening and closing of the manual, which is what we do when we use them, takes a toll, especially on something as old as these are.
Another issue is the quality of the paper itself in the old manuals. The images might be sharp and clear, but the paper they're printed on is often barely a step above tissue paper in quality. I'm sure this was done to keep the costs down, and no one back then cared at all that people might want to use these manuals a half-century later.
I would have no problem purchasing a reproduction manual from a reputable seller. After all, that's what I did.
Just to toot the horn of reproduction manuals a little more, here's the '67 manual I bought. Whoever did it went one better than GM did originally and made it a two-volume set. Olds made the 1964 service manual a multiple-volume set but never did it again. This '67 manual, in total, runs to about 1200 pages. That's a lot of pages for a book like this with paper covers, it's always difficult to balance on your lap or on a car fender, and it's just heavy to carry around. As a two-volume set, it's much easier to handle.
I took a photo of one of the inside pages, too, and I think the images are every bit as good as the originals.
OP, Just take a picture of the area in question and I'm sure one of the prewar early post war guys on this forum will have a answer. If it were me I would post it on this forum on the ongoing thread named 45- 46 how many have them. that is where the oldie but goodies hang... Tedd
Yes he would, but one problem at a time. You appear to get exercised over almost nothing.If he reads the posts he knows that he could use a manual, this suggestion could get him out of his grief by tomorrow. Take a deep breath and relax... Lost in the fifties ... Tedd
The OP asked for a schematic. I suggested a service manual. The one I pointed to happened to be a reproduction. Mr chanic comes on and uses the occasion to impugn, unfairly, I thought, the quality of reproduction manuals. I offered a defense of them and an example of the quality that reproduced manuals can exhibit.
If that's getting "exercised," then I get exercised.
