Posting of procedures, tech data, etc.

General topics relative to the Caprice and associated vehicles. For items not fitting into other sub-sections in addition to general chat.
Post Reply
Navy Lifer
Administration Staff
Posts: 1724
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:30 pm
Location: Canton GA

Posting of procedures, tech data, etc.

Post by Navy Lifer »

I've been frustrated on Impala SS Forum, in the majority of responses to a topic that interests me, by frequent lack of supporting data when a repair is accomplished or a mod is installed.

Ideally, when a PPV owner does something to their car that is at all complex, unique, or in some way requires access to a procedure, whether from a GM service manual, bulletin, or manufacturer-supplied documentation, I hope that some reference to that procedure will be included in the write-up. Others who wish to do the same thing on their car (examples of common "mods" are installing rear spoiler, fog lamps, mirror covers, side repeaters, etc).

There are some copyright restrictions to be mindful of, that may, at least from GM's viewpoint, prohibit actually posting some information. The GM PPV Factory Service Manual (FSM), as do all GM tech publications, has restrictions on it's use as far as posting excerpts & procedures verbatim--not to mention that the manual (a 2 volume set, I recall) is currently $200 from Helm, so, in spite of the legal ramifications, the temptation will be to copy & post FSM data that GM may consider to be a problem worthy of legal action--consider this a wake-up call.

In the best scenario, if we're doing our own mods or repairs, and FSM data is referenced, hopefully enough of us will have one to share in our own locality, or at least share the information off-line. Since these cars have several years of warranty life left before most repairs will fall to the owner, or at least outside of dealer/manufacturer responsibility, to perform (depending on what is broken & why), this may be a bit over-cautious to bring up. I don't work for Helm and I'm not trying to sell FSM's!

I'm going to begin posting in each appropriate topic area some of the mods that I'm planning and that others are already doing or planning, that I'm aware of, in the format I'm proposing below. I hope before we get too deep into this, such a standard format can be arrived at that everyone will try to use--sort of a boilerplate format, which will provide all the data needed if someone else wants to do the same thing to their PPV.

Here's my rough format proposal - suggestions/inputs welcome:

Subject: (what is being accomplished)

OE part numbers being used: (even if they're from Australia)

Aftermarket part numbers being used:

Tools required:

Torque values in the procedure, if known or required: (can be integrated into procedure)

Detailed, step-by-step procedure:

Tips & tricks:

Pictures:

Bill
leadfart
Posts: 465
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:00 am
Location: Treasure Island, Lake McQueeney, TX

Re: Posting of procedures, tech data, etc.

Post by leadfart »

Bah, humbug! :D
Bob Dannelley
2011 Alto Gray 9C3 Caprice PPV-Maggie-11.64@119.68-Sold!
1995 DCM Impala SS-409-Stroker!-11.83@115
2014 Silver Ice LTZ Silverado Crewcab 4X4
2007 Black Z51 M6-Corvette Coupe
User avatar
elc32955
System Manager
Posts: 2718
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:32 am
Location: East Central Florida
Contact:

Re: Posting of procedures, tech data, etc.

Post by elc32955 »

Over the years I've been frustrated as well by different people's mod write-ups. Some are excellent quality, you can tell they would excel in a technical writing environment. Others, well..... meh. Pictures do help considerably, good quality pictures even more. Some people can't follow a written procedure worth a darn, others can follow chapter, letter, verse. It all depends on whether the person doing the write up is articulate and has a sincere interest in having his/her work reproduced. Follow-on questions can explain points, but I've seen 10 or more pages of questions on just one mod, half of which seem to ask different varities of the same question.

As you've already stated, if available, part numbers, sources, etc... are also very important. I don't have a problem at all with following a suggested format for mods/write-ups, but we all need to keep in mind that everyone performing a write-up is volunteering their time, information, and pictures to do so for the benefit of the group.

As a side thought, perhaps what we can do on write-ups is to voluntarily submit them all through one member, they can be edited, sanitized, follow-up information obtained, then published on the tech section for view. There is one very good Commodore board that I follow in Oz that does this, the system operator took the lead in editing and posting the write-ups. I don't know if I want to be the go-to guy for that portion of the system, but I'm open for any suggestions on how to make it work. Bill, you were absolutely correct, what we agree upon and establish now will probably be the format for all time here....

Regarding the tech data, I've seen a variety of types of tech data posted over the years on different systems. I don't think we'll get in trouble directly posting TSB and recall data text, that's pretty much open-source stuff published by the manufacturer, it's also available via government websites. I don't have a Mitchell subscription but I know others do, as long as we don't PDF the pages directly from the sites/books, etc...

Other things are protected as well by copyright such as the ordering guides, etc etc., really almost anything Chevrolet or Holden publishes is pretty much covered under this umbrella. If we are careful in how the tech data is used, I don't think we'll run into a problem, again, as long as we don't publish copies of direct sections of the books.

If we're asked by someone in authority with GM/Helm/Holden to remove material, if it's copyrighted and we verify the copyright, we don't have much of a choice. I spent the $200 for the 2011 Helm (it's three volumes BTW), but I wouldn't publish direct document images in an open forum. If a particular member runs into a problem and needs specific data, well that may be what off-site EMAIL is for (I.E. detailed information too specific for the forum, I'm not advocating violating a copyright). I can tell you from some personal research last year that global parts lists with part numbers seem to be a specific hot button with GM/Holden. For whatever reason they do not want master parts lists floating around.

Just my .02 worth, everyone please comment! Bill, thanks for taking the interest to try to promote order early on!

Eric
System Manager and your tour guide for the day. 2015 Caprice w/LFX, former NC DPS staff car. Partial hybrid G8/SS/Camaro SS interior mods, SS MyLink radio upgrade, 2016 Camaro V6 rims, GMPP Malibu chrome exhaust tips, otherwise bone stock for now.
User avatar
storm9c1
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:47 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Posting of procedures, tech data, etc.

Post by storm9c1 »

I'm good with the suggestions. I'm an engineer by trade, so I can appreciate having some order. I don't think it needs to be a hard-and-fast policy per se. I think if we post a write-up and we cover the information mentioned above (no matter what order its in for example), I think it's good. Some write-ups can take considerable time and effort, and with busy lives, sometimes it's easier to leave out some details as they may be implied (or even forgotten as the process was completed). As long as there is enough information to "fill in the blanks" and it's clearly written, we will be OK.

I value complete sentences and proper english over whether a 9mm socket was used with a short or long extension. I can certainly figure out those little technical details on my own. But reading poorly written garbage text is really annoying. I'll ditch a forum rather quickly if I start seeing too many useless answers to questions (or useless half-hearted write-ups).

We all have different skills for writing. So if a member posts a procedure and it needs some editing, why not clean it up a little? I do not object to that if it will help everyone. This is kinda what Wiki's are for, even though they never seem to catch on either.
Tom (AKA: Storm)
2011 Caprice 9C3: L77, 8K miles, first-owner, purchased July 2011.
1995 Caprice 9C1: LT1, 178K miles, summer car.
1995 Impala SS: LT1, 21K miles.
1995 Caprice Wagon: LT1, 62K miles.
1995 Caprice Wagon: LT1, 128K miles. Rust In Pieces
1994 Caprice 9C1: LT1, beater winter car.
1969 Chevy C30: 383ci stroker, 4L80E, rollback car hauler.
1972 Chrysler Newport: 400ci big block, survivor 27K miles, 2-door hardtop.
1969 Dodge Charger: 383ci big block.
Post Reply