From the Rolls-Royce experimental archive: a quarter of a million communications from Rolls-Royce, 1906 to 1960's. Documents from the Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation (SHRMF).
Correspondence page from 'The Autocar' magazine featuring letters from readers.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 160\5\ scan0349 | |
| Date | 3rd October 1941 | |
| October 3rd, 1941 The Autocar 793 CORRESPONDENCE OPINIONS EXPRESSED ARE THOSE OF OUR CORRESPONDENTS, WITH WHICH "THE AUTOCAR" DOES NOT NECESSARILY AGREE. LETTERS INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO THE EDITOR, "THE AUTOCAR," DORSET HOUSE, STAMFORD STREET, LONDON, S.E.1 CARS THAT ARE STOLEN 120,000 Miles on a 1934 Austin Ten That Showed No After-effects [50381.]—Having just completed 113,000 miles on my 1934 Austin Ten, I think it may be of interest that this particular car in its early days met with misfortune in the shape of being stolen. In the course of my business I often have to investigate claims made by owners of stolen cars, and in a great number of cases of those recovered the owners have a long tale of woe to tell, such as the engine having been run without oil, the clutch slipping, the brakes being useless and there being a peculiar noise from the rear axle. The original owner had this car stolen in London in 1934, when it had completed some 6,000 miles, and it was about three months afterwards found by the police in Cornwall and brought back to London, where I and the owner had to identify it. As the insurance company concerned had already supplied the owner with another car, I purchased this one. Other than taking the precautions of having the oil changed in the engine, gear box and rear axle, nothing needed to be done and off I went on my business calls. The total mileage is now 120,000, during which I have never had an involuntary stop and, furthermore, I can say that I have never had an “assisted” start. Naturally, I have run through a few tyres and batteries during these years, not to mention a couple of rebores and front axle rebushing. The rear axle and transmission have never had a part replaced, and although I had these parts examined a few months ago, nothing was needed with the exception of new oil. C. N. WALLIS. Stanmore, Middlesex. FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE Experience in the Service of Ordinary Road Use [50382.]—With reference to “F.{Mr Friese} S. G.{Mr Griffiths - Chief Accountant / Mr Gnapp}’s” remarks [50352], I should like to say that my unit has an American two-four-wheel drive model. This truck was left with the front wheels engaged for six weeks (owing to misinterpretation of the American instruction book). During this time it was regularly driven on the roads an average of ten miles per day. “The Scribe's” recent discourse sent me running to the vehicle, to have my worst fears realised! As suggested by “F.{Mr Friese} S. G.{Mr Griffiths - Chief Accountant / Mr Gnapp},” the only damage was a jammed lever, easily freed with a little ingenuity. TECHNICAL OFFICER. H.M. Forces. ACCESSIBILITY Sump Draining Without Inconvenience [50383.]—After reading Mr. T. Jesse Wadlow's letter [50339] I feel I must point out that there has been, to my knowledge, at least one car on the market which does not require one to lie underneath when changing the sump oil, and so acquire a coating of mud, oil, dust, etc. I refer to the 10 h.p. Lagonda Rapier. To drain the sump oil from this rather remarkable little car it is only necessary to turn the lever of a spring-loaded foot valve. The valve is then lifted from its seating by the reaction of the lever in passing over a cam-shaped surface, and the whole operation of changing the oil can be completed very quickly with the minimum of inconvenience to oneself if the process is carried out with the engine warm. Although the particular design of sump fitted to the Rapier lends itself very well to this method, I can see no good reason why, with a very few modifications, it cannot be adapted to any shape of sump. M.{Mr Moon / Mr Moore} SMITH. Kingston-upon-Thames. B 13 Image Caption: “East Anglia” features frequently in the news. Here is a peacetime view of one of its many delightful villages, noteworthy for the pleasing style of cottage architecture. “BEST BRITISH RACING DRIVER” Position Deserved by Raymond Mays [50384.]—Your article on the “Best British Driver” is one of the best and most interesting articles ever published. It states clear facts in a very fair way and is just the type of writing that all motor-racing fans will like. I am a great follower of racing and a keen reader of The Autocar, and to anyone who has followed motor racing Raymond Mays has been placed in the position he so justly deserves as our best driver. FRED BOARDMAN. Fleetwood, Lancs. A Contributor’s Findings Supported, with One Exception [50385.]—Your contributor who signs himself “Scavenge Pump” has dealt with the subject of the “Best British Racing Driver,” in a very creditable manner (The Autocar, September 12th), and started in a very good way by laying down definite limits to the scope of the article; a thing not often done in discussions on “the best.” He has confined his choice to drivers who were still racing up to the outbreak of war and has taken his first five from the more active ones of later years. He does not specify this as a limit, so I should like to make the claim that J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} P. Wakefield be replaced by C. E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} C. Martin. As mentioned in the article, Martin put up two very good shows at Avus and in the Nuffield Trophy in an E.R.A., but what of his second places, in his 2.9 Alfa-Romeo, in the 1936 Donington G.P., to a then latest type 3.8 Alfa-Romeo, and to Wimille, on the works Bugatti, at Dieppe in the same year? Also during that year he did some very fine driving at Donington with the Alfa-Romeo in short events. His handling of the 3.3 Bugatti in the I.O.M. and elsewhere must not be forgotten, nor the Imperial Trophy, 1937, when he held the lead from Trossi and Bira for some laps until the gear box “went wrong.” Although Martin has not run in as many events as the other | ||