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).
Comparing the cost and design of different push rods for B.60 and B.80 engines.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 124\1\ scan0004 | |
| Date | 2nd March 1939 | |
| 1044 To HPS.{Horace Percy Smith - Experimental Factory Mgr} from Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/Swdl.{Len H. Swindell} c. By/CS. c. Da{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}/Jnr.{Charles L. Jenner} c. Da{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}/McS. Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/Swdl.{Len H. Swindell}1/MH.{M. Huckerby}2.3.39. B.60 & B.80 PUSH RODS. The cost figures of the various types of push rods compare as follows:- .4 carbon steel solid rods.............1 Steel tubular rods with flash butt welded ends......................2 Dural tubular rods with fitted steel ends............................3 In view of the above and the fact that steel gives the most suitable expansion rate the solid steel rods have the advantage. Such rods have been drawn for the above units to EB.4199, these, however, do not incorporate the deeper cups of the B.V. rods EB.4516, which is a preventative against the push rods coming out of mesh in the event of a valve spring failure. Will you therefore, instruct that the existing B.60 and B.80 engines be fitted with these rods, i.e. EB.4516 top cups but length of rod as EB.4199, a drawing for these being required. In conjunction with the new cylinder head for B.60 (PD.308) new push rods have been schemed to PD.378 and are only applicable to this head both in respect of their length and the reduced diameter of push rod tubes in the cylinder head. Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/Swdl.{Len H. Swindell} | ||