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).
Comparison of car batteries, including Peto & Radford and C.A.V-Willard, based on performance, efficiency, and weight.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\G\August1921\ Scan52 | |
| Date | 12th August 1921 | |
| Contd. -2- EPCR/T12.8.21. has been running on the Demonstration Car since January last, having run 15,000 miles in all. We have had several satisfactory reports of this battery, the last one stating that apart from adding distilled water the battery has received no attention, and is at the present in first class condition, no corrosion of the terminals having taken place. It would appear that either of these batteries is a good proposition for car service. Electrical efficiency is not a strong point, but Messrs. Peto & Radford have no doubt by experience sacrificed some of this in order to get a battery which is more generally suitable for car service. One is not sure whether sacrifice of electrical efficiency is inevitable, (it is probable that these two batteries have had very little lighting work to do and therefore the low electrical efficiency might not be noticed), as it is to be noted that the C.A.V-Willard battery is quite high in electrical efficiency, also our present standard battery with modifications, (although the electrical efficiency has been somewhat reduced) is still higher than the first of these P & R batteries. Note that the weights of the P & R batteries are round about 100 lbs. and their lighting capacities round about 50 ampere-hours., whereas the weights of the present standard and Contd. (upside down text) R.R. 285A (100 T) (S.H 159 11-8-20) G.{Mr Griffiths - Chief Accountant / Mr Gnapp} 2800 | ||