So, it’s not uncommon for me to face a long series. Many cheap thrillers in particular have huge numbers of installments in them. The pattern I faced with the Survivalist – grab the whole thing and read it all from start to finish – isn’t necessarily the best. And not just because I’m leery of repeating the gonzo “27 BOOKS I CAN DO THIS!” attitude. Ahern’s knack for long , connected “soap operas” was different from many other books aiming for each installment to be as self-contained as possible. So if there isn’t an explicit connection, then I tend to go for…
- The initial one. First because it’s the sane place to start, and also because first impressions matter to me.
If it’s short, I just grab the whole series if the first book is good. If not, then…
- The installment(s) with the most out-there premise. I can read five books about Mack Bolan facing mobsters/terrorists, or I can read a book where he fights some weirdly supernatural, out-of-character opponent. The latter seems more appealing.
- Failing that, the installment generally considered either the best (obvious reason) or worst (Is it really that bad?).
Coiler's Creative Corner 
I just wrapped up Harry Turtledove’s American Empire, and Settling Accounts series. Not the first time I read them, but the first time I did the titles consecutively. Took about a month and a half but well worth it
LikeLike