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).
Page from a motoring publication featuring reader correspondence on various car-related topics.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 160\5\ scan0233 | |
| Date | 14th February 1941 | |
| 158 Correspondence WHY DID THE ENGINE "HEAVE"? Stopped Previously on the Compression Point [49980.]—With regard to letter [49967] from Mr. W. B. Cook, I would like to suggest that a possible answer to his problem is that by chance the engine, when switched off, stopped just on compression point, and, as the unit was warm, the action of again switching on and off caused a possible spark at the distributor points to ignite the vapour left in the cylinder and consequently rotate the crankshaft a slight amount. I may add that most engines with a hand ignition control or fairly wide range can be started up again, when warm, by sharply moving the control to and fro a couple of times, provided, of course, that the engine has previously chanced to stop on compression point. W. G.{Mr Griffiths - Chief Accountant / Mr Gnapp} PAPPICK. Edgware, Middx. Similar Phenomenon Observed in the Same Model [49981.]—Reading your excellent journal the other week, as I do every week, I came across a letter which interested me especially. It was from Mr. W. B. Cook [49946] and mentioned a noticeable "heave" in the engine of his Standard Eight if the ignition was switched on again shortly after switching off on arrival in the garage. I own a Standard Eight which is now two years old and I have found the same "phenomenon." I would be very interested to hear an explanation. I might add that the overall petrol consumption for this car for 15,000 miles was 41.4 m.p.g., 11,000 miles of the total being done on Pool petrol. I would be very interested to hear from other Standard owners on this subject, and also if they know any method of improving the petrol consumption—pure greed! All the best to The Journal for '41. MEDICO. Carlisle. [A broadly similar explanation to that given in the letter above from Mr. Paddick was offered by two other correspondents in the last issue.—ED.{J. L. Edwards}] MEMORIES THAT INTEREST Keeping in Touch with Motoring Matters [49982.]—Before the war I was a member of the E.R.A. Club and a keen spectator at all motor racing events. Since then I have been out of touch with motoring matters and have only just started to take The Autocar regularly again, having found that there is still plenty to interest the enthusiast, even if it be only memories! (Capt.) J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} T. D.{John DeLooze - Company Secretary} Home Forces. ENGINES THAT ARE DIFFERENT An Unorthodox Design That Created Considerable Interest Some Years Ago [49983.]—As a young mechanic and a regular reader of The Autocar, I would like to express my views on your new series under this title. I have found it most interesting, and was particularly interested in the American Powell leverage engine (January 4th issue). It rather puzzled me at first, as I could see that there must be some snag. I soon realised, however, that it is no more than an engine with an exceptionally long stroke. You state that the piston speed was twice the crankshaft speed. How can revs per minute be compared with feet per minute? If the piston rod was connected direct to a suitable crankshaft, the revs of the crankshaft would still be the same, although the crankpin would travel twice the distance. Of course, such a long stroke, if coupled direct, would be impracticable for obvious reasons. The designer can, then, claim the advantage of a long stroke—if this is an advantage! There are, however, a few minor advantages in the design such as reduced piston-rod angularity, side thrust, and dead centre effects. The advantages would no doubt be outweighed by greater difficulty of manufacture and increased cost. This probably explains the disappearance of the design. Please continue your series entitled "Talking of Sports Cars." It is very interesting. G.{Mr Griffiths - Chief Accountant / Mr Gnapp} NEWHAM. Lye, near Stourbridge, Worcs. "THE THRILL OF WINTER" But There Are Limits to the Enjoyment of Snowcovered Landscape! [49984.]—Your article (January 24th issue) on the attractions of snow in the country prompts me to send you a snapshot of our "pioneer" section setting out for supplies after last winter's storm. This year the drifts have been much bigger, and for a week all food, letters, etc., had to be fetched on foot; and this is by no means a "back of beyond" district. I grant your contributor, Mr. Leslie Samson, the beauty of the countryside under snow and admit the splendid exercise afforded by digging out one's car, but I fail to appreciate trampling across country and falling in snowdrifts, hung about with parcels like a Christmas tree. May I say how I appreciate your articles on "These Cars Made History" and "Talking of Sports Cars," and could not Mr. J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} Appleyby describe some of his "different" engines a little more fully? Setting out for supplies in a Lagonda—an episode in one of last winter's visitations of snow. See letter No. [49984]. 24 February 14th, 1941 THE AUTOCAR 159 Correspondence D.{John DeLooze - Company Secretary} H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} COATES. Hatfield, Grimsby. "TALKING OF SPORTS CARS" The 3.3-litre Bugatti Owner Reopens a Discussion [49985.]—In spite of the fact that several weeks have elapsed since I participated in the correspondence on the relative merits of Mr. F.{Mr Friese} Lycett's 8-litre Bentley and my 3.3-litre type 57S Bugatti; and "my vow of silence, self imposed though it be," as Mr. Lycett put it, in reply to my previous "last word" in December last, I feel I must accept the invitation contained in the Editor's footnote to Mr. Lycett's letter [49904] in your issue of December 27th last, to reopen this interesting discussion. Of course, the original subject was acceleration to certain high speeds, as Mr. Lycett rightly pointed out in the above-mentioned letter. But he is not altogether correct when he says that this "has always been the sole point at issue," because in his very first letter on the subject he, as always, compared the figure I gave with a timed performance that he can put up on the Bentley. That was "distinctly a my-Bentley-can-easily-beat-your-Bugatti" challenge, which naturally invited a reply from me (labelled long and spirited) in defence of the Bugatti. In so doing, I freely admitted that his Bentley was definitely superior in performance, but also pointed out why this should be so. Again, in support of the marque Bugatti, I gave facts and figures relating to other Bugatti types, which could be fairly compared with the Bentley data. Thus, the discussion became one between the marque Bugatti (as distinct from my particular coupe) and Mr. Lycett's Bentley; and it was at this juncture that, seeing the self-styled and yet unproved invincibility of his Bentley seriously threatened (admittedly on paper), he declined to play, and labelled my statements "redundant and irrelevant," and more recently "smoke screens and red-herrings"! (Such phraseology is like a B.B.C. comment on one of Hitler's diatribes!) He seems to forget, however, that he started this comparison and I carried it to its logical conclusion. But in so doing, I showed that there are cars in the world the equal of his much-publicised Bentley—and that's a very bitter pill to his sarcastic "crack" about "admitting the Bentley's inferiority to the Bugatti with, of course, Mr. Hampton at its wheel," caused much amusement amongst the folk with whom I was stationed at the time, and all sorts of suggestions were put forward as suitable replies. But I fear they would have been "blue-pencilled"! To anyone who didn't already know it, however, I would just comment that I never claimed to be a better driver than Mr. Lycett—nor even as good, maybe (and after what has been written about him in more than one motoring publication recently, one would have to be a real "ace" to stake such a claim). I merely stated that in my Bug, I have "done" the Barn on the Barnet-by-pass to Great Yarmouth in two hours—that's my story and I'm sticking to it! Quite possibly we exchanged cars for a day, with Mr. Lycett's far greater experience of cruising at 100 (and record breaking), the difference in time would be greater still. Since I last participated in this discussion several interesting letters have appeared from third parties. The letter from Mr. John P. Bennet [49919] in your issue of January 3rd was very enlightening and Mr. Lycett's reply thereto [49947] provided no real answer. Incidentally, it is interesting to note that the Bugatti Type 57 T.T. models (not even the 57 S, which is considerably faster) were driven by Lord Howe and Brian Lewis in the T.T. each year (I believe in 1935) were, if I remember rightly, first over the Ards circuit, and certainly no meaner than the late Hall's wonderful 3½-litre Bentley—the car referred to by Mr. Bennet as a probable champion of the 8-litre. How much faster, then, would be the latest Type 57 SC? Thus if it is questionable whether the 8-litre could beat Hall's 3½ of 1935 vintage, it is a certainty that a 1939-40 Type 57 SC—works tuned and Roadworthy—would have no difficulty in doing so. Q.E.D.! But then I have said all this before, and quoted Le Mans and Montlhéry performances to substantiate my belief. Again, I think the letter from "Tourist Trophy" [49917] hits the nail right on the head. The letter from Mr. F.{Mr Friese} Heathcote [49940] sets out accurately the various Bugatti types (I'm glad someone has done this, as no one ever seems to get them right. Press included!). Lastly, there was that long letter from Mr. W. Boddy [49921] in your issue of December 13th last. I assume the only reason that Mr. Lycett referred to it as a "timely intervention" was because Mr. Boddy chose to write a pro-Lycett letter after I had declared the correspondence closed as far as I was concerned. My comments on his letter are that (a) he is probably misinformed in believing that a supercharged engine will not run so well on Pool petrol as the Bentley's. I think the opposite would be the case, due to the use of a lower compression ratio and a better fuel mixture; my "blown" 1,750 c.c. Alfa certainly runs better on Pool than most unblown sports cars of equal performance. (b) Am I wrong in believing the 8-litre concerned to have a special Laystall crankshaft? (c) In view of extensive chassis lightening and alteration and general yearly modernisation, etc. (recently admitted elsewhere by Mr. Lycett), the date of birth, 1931, bears little relation to the car to-day, except that it still retains an enormous engine—a fact generally overlooked when praising its performance. The design of my Bug is virtually unchanged. (d) How does Mr. Boddy know it is wrong to suggest that Mr. Lycett employs special plug settings? If he does know (on his own admission) what it means? Maybe he isn't aware that with high-performance sports cars after a time the plug gaps vary and the points "grow whiskers." (e) I never used "the fastest road car" race as evidence that a 57 SC Bug could lick the 8-litre. How could it? I have seen that Bug in the race; and lastly (f) All Bugattis will start from cold on its usual plugs (the 57 S sometimes difficult in really cold weather); and will run well on Pool (the 57 S, with 8.3 to 1 compression ratio, will not). Both are essentially dependable in the right hands (like any thoroughbred), and will do 14-18 m.p.g. W. P. HAMPTON. H.M. Forces. [From letters received from other readers, it is clear that many will welcome this further expression of opinion.—ED.{J. L. Edwards}] "EVERYMAN" AND SPORTS CARS Views Which Jar [49986.]—I would like to begin this letter by saying that it is in no way intended as a criticism of your excellent publication, of which I have been a devoted reader practically all my life, and by congratulating you on the wonderful way in which you have managed to maintain interest in spite of the immense difficulties imposed on you by wartime conditions. But is it necessary for every slightly egotistic small car owner among your readers to write and inform us that his car, whatever make it may be, is the answer to the "Everyman car" problem? In the Editorial with which, some months ago, you launched the discussion, you pointed out that an essential feature of the "Everyman car" was that it must be within reach of the pocket of "Everyman" as far as possible. Can the Ford Ten, Morris Ten, Jowett, or any of the other cars suggested by your owner correspondents, excellent machines though they certainly are, claim to be sold at anything like the requisite price for an "Everyman car"? Speed, comfort, a feamed appearance, and last, but not least, the excellent Lockheed hydraulic brakes I quoted later [49947] are very pleasant and advantageous features, but without the addition of absolute minimum possible cost, and the inclusion of all essential safety and utility measures, these cannot be "Everyman cars." And again, in the course of the most interesting series of articles and letters under the heading of "Talking of Sports Cars" I have noticed a quite unnecessarily truculent and offensive attitude on the part of Mr. F.{Mr Friese} Lycett. Every time anyone attempts to mention another car in the mildest comparison with his Bentley he rises up and writes a witheringly sarcastic letter in reply, repeating all his past boasts and praises of his own car and trying to convey the impression that he has been personally insulted. Mr. Lycett's Bentley is a glorious car. We all know and envy him it, and nobody has denied its many qualities. But it is by no means a recent design, and it has an enormous engine. Are we, then, never to be allowed to mention and take an interest in a smaller and more modern car without exciting an outburst of protest from this almost excessively proud owner? A.{Mr Adams} L. MARSH. Woking. SUMMARY OF CORRESPONDENCE OLD-TYPE DARRACQ.—"K.{Mr Kilner} H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints}," Portsmouth, would welcome as much information as possible with regard to a 1905-1910 12 h.p. four-cylinder side-valve Darracq. This car was in regular use until 1937, the owner living in Alton. ENGINE WANTED.—Mr. G.{Mr Griffiths - Chief Accountant / Mr Gnapp} Newham, Lye, Worcs, who refers to amateur-rebuilt cars described recently in "Talking of Sports Cars" in The Autocar, intends to build a sports model himself, and would like to obtain a "hot" engine of 7 or 8 h.p., or possibly one for not more than £4. MOTOR RACING BOOKS.—"J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} L. L.," Harrogate, is anxious to obtain four books on motor racing to complete his collection, and would be very pleased to hear if any reader can supply them. They are:—Sir Malcolm Campbell's "My Thirty Years of Speed," "Boys' Life of Sir Henry Segrave," Barré Lyndon's "Combat," and "Kaye Don—The Man," by H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} Wentworth Day. BOOKS FOR MOTORISTS Issued in conjunction with "THE AUTOCAR" Net Price. By Post. The Autocar Handbook ... 3/- ... 3/5 The Autocar Guide for the "L" Driver ... 1/- ... 1/2 Look After Your Car... ... 2/6 ... 2/9 The Motor Vehicle ... 10/6 ... 11/1 Know Your Car ... 1/6 ... 1/8 Motor Driving Made Easy ... 2/3 ... 2/10 More Sketches by Casque ... 2/- ... 2/3 Automobile Electrical Equipment ... 10/3 ... 11/1 The Modern Diesel ... 3/6 ... 3/11 The Autocar Register ... 3/- ... 3/5 By P. M.{Mr Moon / Mr Moore} Heldt, M.S.A.E.:— High Speed Combustion Engines ... 42/- ... 42/7 Motor Vehicles and Tractors ... 42/- ... 42/7 Fuels and Carburettors ... 18/- ... 18/7 High Speed Diesel Engines ... 27/- ... 27/7 Full particulars of any of the above books will be sent on application. Obtainable from Leading Booksellers and Railway Bookstalls or direct (remittance with order) from ILIFFE & SONS LTD.; Dorset House, Stamford Street; London, S.E.1 | ||