title_body: Are Baen eARC editions generally very different from final published books? eARC ebooks are Baen's business approach to releasing advanced book copy to the readers prior to publishing.
  
  
    An eARC is an electronic Advance Reader Copy. This is an unproofed manuscript and is guaranteed to be full of typos and error. It is pretty much raw from the authors word processor. But you get the entire eARC well in advance of even the Monthly Baen Bundle release.
  
  
  Is there any information about how different the eARC versions are, on average, from final published Baen books? If possible, I'm seeking a study across many different eARCs that did detailed analysis, as opposed to personal impressions.
  
  Reason for asking: sometimes I have a chance to read an eARC of a book I eagerly anticipate, but worry that I will not be able to afford the time to re-read the published one later on - so if eARC is materially worse, it's better to be patient and wait till the final version is sold.
upvoted_answer: The eARC (electronic Advance Reader Copy) editions vary widely in quality because the editor, proofreader and copy editor haven't got their hands dirty. Some are great, some are OK. In every case the final book is better. If you are thinking about self publishing I recommend reading both versions of at least one book. You will come to appreciate Eric Flint's philosophy about delaying publication until his favorite editor has time.
  
  On the other hand if you have to know what happens in the Peoples Republic of Haven, you will not see any plot changes, just grammar, formatting and spelling.