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).
Feedback and proposed design changes for the 20/25 model's front and rear aprons.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\V\March1931-September1931\ Scan345 | |
| Date | 14th August 1931 | |
| HS.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} FROM DA{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}/EV{Ivan Evernden - coachwork} C. to [REDACTED] C. to [REDACTED] 20/25 FRONT & REAR APRONS. ORIGINAL RECEIVED 22 JUL 1931 DA{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}/EV{Ivan Evernden - coachwork}1/M14.8.31. Sent off 22/8/31 X4531. We saw 19-G-4. here today and had an opportunity of examining the aprons. We think the horizontal type frontapron looks quite nice. We would like to see the boxes over the lamp standard bases as small as possible and rounded at the corners. To reduce the size of this box we suggest that if you have not already done so countersunk headed screws could be used with their heads in the inner plate of the lamp bracket as shewn on our sch. for the apron-N. sch.3138.(P.2.) The fixing for the front number plate appeared to be too elastic and caused a rattle. On our sch. for the P. 2. apron we suggest two down looking strips being fitted to the apron riveted to the scroll and also to the flat/plate of the apron. These could be set fairly close together and have holes for fixing the number plate so that the bolts would come above and below the letters. The minimum length of a number pl/ate now-a-days is constituted by two letters and a number, that is, 11.750", so these two brackets could be say 10" apart and permanently riveted to the apron (see sketch attached.) With respect to the rear apron we realise of course that this was only made as a model for shewing to the coachbuilders, but we feel that it is not quite what we expected. We do not like the pot over the tank fittings, and were hoping you would have followed the 40/50 design having a complete ridge in the apron covering the fittings and extending the whole widh of the apron, and being carried on in the design of the wing valance - see sketch attached. Also the wings of the particular car in question had not any valance extending down to the rear dumb irons which rather spoiled the appearance. The pot over the K.{Mr Kilner} S. gauge fitting was unduly large. We have already pointed out to you that when an apron is fitted there is no need to fit an aluminium cover over the pipes, such as we now do as standard. We suggest that this cover can with advantage be removed and then the size of the bulge extending the whole width of the apron can be appreciably reduced. We enclose herewith a sketch conveying our ideas and we suggest that you will wish to make up another apron for model purposes. [Signature] DA{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}/EV.{Ivan Evernden - coachwork} | ||