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).
Modifications and testing procedures for the P.2 10,000 miles trial.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\V\March1931-September1931\ Scan230 | |
| Date | 30th May 1931 | |
| HS.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} FROM R.{Sir Henry Royce} C. to SG.{Arthur F. Sidgreaves - MD} WOR.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} C. to E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} DA.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} BY.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} ORIGINAL P. 2. 10,000 MILES TRIAL. In reply to your HS{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}9/MJ28531., I must again emphasise my impression that we should not go to the expense of sending the car to France until we can extend the experiment to something more than the simple removal of the rear feet, and since we have waited so long I am sure it will be worth while waiting a week or two longer until we can get our conversion system complete or nearly complete, so that we can prove this, which will be proving the diamond mounting at the same time. Some of the parts could be the existing ones or temporary ones of some sort. They need not be a complete production job, but should embody the principles. It would appear from your memo. that balance weights with the present crankshaft are impossible on P. 2. to any extent because the 8 balance weight scheme is the lightest we know, and we should have thought that the units could be made to help the bearing and still keep clear of the master period at full speed, that is, having adopted the lightest scheme the amount of the balance weight unit is controlled by the master period. One would think that it would be safe to reduce the master period by the balance weights about 10%. It is also assumed that the sports car should have at least another tooth in the back axle gear. About this we have never quite agreed but I certainly think the alternative should be tried and submitted to PN.{Mr Northey} for his criticism as to which he thinks will give the greatest satisfaction. My own feeling, and that of a few others, is decidedly in favour of a slightly higher gear. Bentley's experience seems to support this, and we think it certainly will be advisable when we get twin carburettors. It is also extremely reasonable that the gear ratio should be different for cars of entirely different character, such as the big heavy limousine, and the continental sports. At the end of these experiments we ought to be able to give some very good information, first with the rear feet only removed then with the addition of the front suspension, and hard and soft rubber front feet, and with the soft rubber front feet the effect of the torque reaction damper. I am more particularly (1) | ||