Hi guys! I just got here (puffing from running). It's either the fuel inertia switch or panic button.

 

My day late and dollar short opinion- in this day and age of instant gratification, I often wonder why people would sooner post an easily self-answered question (RTFM or Google or search here) and wait hours or days hoping that someone responds. Especially when the answer is RTFM.

 

Er... I'm sorry if I was rather blunt. It's how we tend to be here (Yorkshire). RTFM is very much the idea and since Jaguar provide the handbooks free online (*) I somewhat over-optimistically hope people grab and read even if they haven't got a paper one.

Another couple of things to do: check the locking nut is the RIGHT one for your car and practice taking wheels off BEFORE you need to. Then you'll see why people replace the wheel (lug) nuts and probably carry some better tools...

That's as well as annually checking BOTH your keys do work in all the locks. Yes, both... get another if you've only one would be my advice

(*) other car makers please do the same!!

 

Then get the wife to try it.

 

I will admit without embarrassment that I have never read the owner's manual for any of my cars ( and I'm currently on car #53, according to the list I started last month ).
I've used it as reference material, but I've never wanted to sit down and read it. I get very frustrated at the repetitive / cya nature of the writing, and it seems that most topics have a very cursory explanation before saying "see your dealer". I find it to be a waste of my all-too-precious time.
But, since it seems like reading the owner's manual is a prerequisite to getting a simple response from so many members of this forum..... I guess I'll download a copy and take a seat
I will never get that time back though..... You know? Much worse than a day wasted on the golf course.

 

LOL. Live and learn, Steve! We've all pushed a few of life's "ejector seats", haven't we?

 

I wish it was the ejector seat straight out of a James bond movie and the cars will sell like hot cake and no more back seat drivers.

We can wish Matthew

 

Today's owners manuals are approaching the thickness of War and Peace given the complex nature of the devices they address. Compounded by the average age of a typical owner, the percentage of info retained even after multiple readings of the manual is discouraging.

Is pre-reading every paragraph and page mandatory and worthwhile? Dunno.

In my case, it's my go-to for every instance of 'what's this for' or 'how do I do this'.

 

Well, for the record, I had no problem with this reply from JagV8, who never uses 4 words when 1 will do. I really appreciate his considerable assistance to this forum, and thought the initial reaction was pointless and harsh. Yes, RTFM.

 

I always make time to read the manuals after initial acquisition. Being a speed-reader helps me to do so rather quickly, usually in an hour or so. Granted, some are better written and/or organized than others....

 

I'm glad it's not only me.

When I got my car I'd already been on this forum, reading, because I wasn't going to buy a car I hadn't researched.

I used the handbook and forum to figure a few things out immediately:
1. battery was fitted and vented properly
2. location and contents etc of fuse boxes
3. wheel (lug) nuts were indeed less than the best ever design
4. locking wheel nut key was present and worked
5. spare was good & at correct pressure
6. I had 2 proper keys and they worked in the locks
7. door mirrors flipped in and out OK
8. No water in trunk or evidence of any
Don't recall more but I reckon there were some.

In my case #6 was NO...

I had 2 keys but the boot (trunk) lock was at best semi-working and I knew from my reading this could really bite me so I fixed it.

I hate being stranded and helpless especially if it's my fault in that I failed to do a reasonable amount of work to prevent it. I want a car that "just works" but I know you have to help it be that way. YMMV.

#7 is vital since getting this big a car into my garage is challenging.

 

Oh C'mon... really? you though my reaction was harsh, but his comment was not? again... that's just silly. :-)

Look, I know JagV8 is a wealth of information here, and no offense was intended when I responded to his initial comment. But there is NO WAY to read his comment that does not include a tone of condescension.
I'm a member on two other enthusiast-car forums, where I've watched the slow decline due to the "old-timers" who get a kick out of their "RTFM" attitudes, at the expense of being welcoming to newcomers.
This thread was started by a member who joined less than a month ago, and for whom English is likely not his first language... he posts a reasonable query, and the first thing he gets is "BLAMO: RTFM! Oh, and by the way: you're not smart enough to be messin' around with your car".

I'm merely suggesting that there's a way to respond that can convey your "RTFM" message, without coming-across as so superior. Maybe something like:
"I think I recall seeing something about that in the owners' manual: have you looked there yet?"
or "Somebody here probably knows what that button is for, but it might be faster to find it in the owner's manual. If you don't have one, they can be downloaded for free..."
Or how about "it looks like page XX of the owner's manual describes that as the Inertia Switch. We generally encourage people to check the manual first"

let's be welcoming to those who will keep this group vibrant and new, instead of acting like only those who've been here for awhile are welcome. Teach them kindly the unique etiquette of this forum, like RTFM and this forum's fascinating demand for complete location information, and etc etc etc.
An attitude like this in our posts will keep this forum healthy, and allow the great value that can be found here to be shared by all..... not just a select few.

And I still say that reading the manual cover-to-cover is a good way to become prematurely OLD and BORING. :-)

 

LOL! The OP and many of us are witnessing a "first encounter" with jagv8 (John). We initially had friction but I eventually realized he's a brash but intelligent, good, and caring person..."He ain't heavy, he's my brother". At times I actually believe jagv8 and I race each other to post on new threads. Uh oh! I think I've said too much?

 

What a timely topic. I am in the middle of getting a 1600-page doc set out the door and on the web.

While RTFM works for my books, it might not for other authors. You would hope that the person writing the book understands the content documented, but this is not always the case.

In my tech pubs department, we have writers with English degrees, Technical Writing degrees, no degrees, and in my case, Engineering degrees. As such, you will find the quality of the documentation varies: grammatically correct, lacking substance, passive voice, overly detailed, repetitious, skewed, award-winning, actually useful, inconsistent, unintuitive, and outdated.

Some of the writers don't understand the topic and merely parrot the engineer's words. Others go far enough to fit the proper style to those words. Sadly, only one other writer and myself will take the initiative and actually "get our hands dirty".

What this means is that the book we mistakenly treat as "the word of god" is not. Its been censored, edited, and abridged to be "you need to know only this".

And that is frustrating for me in particular. I want to provide as much useful information to the reader as possible, because I want to help them. Many times I have been told to remove contents because "this is an implementation aspect and the reader does not need to know this". Of course, if the reader knew about the functionality, they would have a better understanding of the feature.

My forte is creating troubleshooting paradigms, that is, models of ways to identify and solve problems. The subject matter experts dislike my procedures that are a quick way to assess the state of a fault condition, or other such short-cuts. They would prefer that I document a more standard, methodical (and stupidly time consuming for the reader) approach. Can you tell they are engineers?

I am not ignorant. I know what is beneficial to the reader because I perform every procedure I document. I write from first-hand experience. Very often what the engineers tell me is wrong, so my books get what is real, not theoretical.

Ok, so I have gone off on a tangent. Yes, please do read the manual. Many people have spent long nights and lost weekends making sure that the content within is of quality and use. But in the same breath, do not take the words as gospel. The book is like any other specific tool in your kit, great for turning Philips head screws, but crap at stripping wire.

 

I have heard that John may be a founder member of the SYP.

 

LOL! Norri, U eloquently summ'ed it up. Thanks.

 

heima, due to the extreme length of your post, admittedly, my ADHD allowed but a few sentences...sounds cool though. LOL!

 

Might explain why some owners don't RTFM and post simple questions instead.

I keed, I keed!

 

eeeaarrrr Seth.

 

That's the damn funniest post I have seen in a long, long time. I will give you thanks later Norri, but for the time being I'm too busy laughing. I'm sure JagV8 is having a chuckle as well. Should be SPY though.