Tweedledum, and Tweedledee, probably were not TOTALLY identical, but . . . the difference between a 2011 and a 2012 manual is probably less. (Credit George Wallace for the, "Through The Looking Glass . . .," reference.)I ordered the Kawasaki Service Manual from eBay the other day, and although the auction said it was part # 99924-1384-12, it was actually the …-11 version. Wondering if I should go to the hassle of a return. Any thoughts? Is the newer one better?
(From Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball; Rhodes' comment about the 2016 presidential election.)There is no doubt that this is a high stakes election. It is not Tweedledum and Tweedledee, as former Alabama Gov. George Wallace famously said of the major parties when he ran as a third-party candidate nearly a half century ago.
Samuel,I ordered the Kawasaki Service Manual from eBay the other day, and although the auction said it was part # 99924-1384-12, it was actually the …-11 version. Wondering if I should go to the hassle of a return. Any thoughts? Is the newer one better?
If you find significant distinction between Tweedledum and Tweedledee; and if you disregard Bill10's comment above, "The manual that I got (from my dealer) for my "2016" model year is part number 99924-1384-10, 10th Edition (1): July 17, 2015 and covers model years 2008 to 2016," then . . . perhaps only the manual most contemporaneous with your bike will guide you correctly through your maintenance and repair activities. Your bike may have significant and unique characteristics escaping the 2008 through 2016 model year time spectrum.Damocles, I sure did, didn't I…! I was kinda hoping someone could say they were actually the exact same thing, but not hearing that, I went with the swap out :19:
I hardly see how the forum inmates' comments you requested could possibly have influenced your conclusion, "Would that not justify the additional trouble of an not-strictly-necessary return and exchange? Surely. Well, that and also: Damn ebay sellers aren't going to lure me into buying their auction with a false part#!" Exchanging the manual appears as both your original intent and final action, to me.Hehe, now I know you're messing me!
I admit, I considered the contemporanaeity of the -11 version and its correlation with my particular vintage, but then I remembered: This bike is basically the same as our forefathers used to hunt the mighty mastadon and to dash across the savannah, amidst packs of sabre-toothed tigers… certainly there were no significant changes between the year in question and the very next! And correct this most certainly was, and yet, the manual… would it also remain the same? Could it not be true that deep in the halls of Fort Kawasaki, there were a publications manager toiling away, collecting stories of subtly mis-specc'd repairs in shops across the globe, maintaining, responding to, and fixing oversights from previous versions of the yearly tome, published in tribute to the great thumping one? And I was like, yeah, that seems possible… Upwards of a dozen figures or recorded measurements could have changed from the -11 version to the -12! Would that not justify the additional trouble of an not-strictly-necessary return and exchange? Surely. Well, that and also: Damn ebay sellers aren't going to lure me into buying their auction with a false part#!
Alas, you suffered the same order mis-fulfillment as Samuel!I ordered a -12, Partzilla sent me a book with a sticker on it that said -12, but the book is marked -11.
The only reason I wanted the -12 was as a hysterical document, perhaps the last of the KLR Gen 2 manuals.
Maybe the -12 is mythical.
I assume they will make a new primary dash number for the Gen 3 KLR.
I should have asked this the other day. What is the current price tag for either the -11 or the -12 manual from any of these on-line suppliers?I have written to Partzilla, asking if there is, indeed, a -12 that I might have in lieu of the old, outdated, mistake-ridden, moldering -11.