Owners Manual

[cparsons]

Can someone clarify a rule for me? What constitutes an "original owner's manual," and how would I prove it is an "original owner's manual"? I have a hard copy that I printed from a .pdf file. Is that acceptable, or do I need to purchase OEM from the dealer and leave it sealed up with the receipt as proof it is from the manufacturer and never been opened, hence altered?

[RussMcB]

Good question. he rule probably shouldn't use those terms. I'd think a service manual would be more appropriate than an owners manual.

I bought a CD with the service manual for my engine (PDF format). I hope that will suffice.

[Dave Gomberg]

Can someone clarify a rule for me? What constitutes an "original owner's manual," and how would I prove it is an "original owner's manual"? I have a hard copy that I printed from a .pdf file. Is that acceptable, or do I need to purchase OEM from the dealer and leave it sealed up with the receipt as proof it is from the manufacturer and never been opened, hence altered?

First, the rule doesn't say "owner's manual". It says "an original factory manual for the engine". (I wouldn't expect an owner's manual to have engine specifications.)

Second, the hard copy shop manuals for these engines are in the $50-60 range (or at least they were when I bought mine a couple of years ago), so having one is not unreasonable. CD versions of the factory manuals are often available for considerably less. I see no reason a PDF file or a printed copy of it would not suffice. If anyone is prepared to create a falsified version of the manual, they should also be prepared to face the consequences of their folly.

Dave

[Stan Clayton]

I agree with Dave. Moreover, at the Runoffs it is the electronic "Updated GCR" (.pdf) which is the official document...NOT the printed version from the previous November. Stan

[cparsons]

thanks for the input gentlemen, I mean no offense, but you all just proved my point. I also don't see why my "printed from .pdf file" manual wouldn't suffice, but does it? It is very nice, printed on 2 sides with holes punched and placed in a very user friendly 3 ring binder, and it does have the engine specs in it. But Yamaha didn't make it, I did. I printed it from their .pdf file. We are assuming that the cd is acceptable too, but is it? The cost of the cd is certainly cheaper than the hard copy, and for me more convenient, but is it considered an acceptable manual? If tech requests to see my copy at impound, I present a cd, and they don't have a pc handy, have I in fact presented my manual? If I use my laptop and my cd, can I expect tech to accept it as original?

It wasn't that long ago that the GCR clearly stated that the latest hardcover, printed version superceded the electronic (cd) version.

Altering a manual to break rules, is, well, stupid. My intention is not to break rules, but to comply with them to the intent of the rule. There is a distinction to be made regarding intent of a rule and the letter of the rule.

I may never make a podium finish, but I certainly wouldn't want to loose it because I assumed a cd was an acceptable manual, but tech didn't have a laptop to play it, therefore didn't accept it as a manual. Or my printed version of the .pdf didn't come with a receipt from Yamaha and I didn't have my credit card receipt to prove I paid for it.

[Matt Conrad]

I believe your PDF version will suffice....as long as it is of the official manual. I have a CD version loaded on my laptop and the tech inpectors were satisfied with that.

Matt Conrad
Phoenix Race Works, LLC

[carnut169]

Its sure would be funny to have two versions of the same motor manual (presented in tech)... say, with different compression ratios.


I agree that having a CD, or a printed version is fine. The point is having "official" specs to tech for your engine.