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).
Requirements and difficulties with magnetos from various manufacturers.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\S\March1928-May1928\ Scan123 | |
| Date | 21th April 1928 | |
| To R.{Sir Henry Royce} from EFC. c. BJ. E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} c. Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} Ev.{Ivan Evernden - coachwork} c. Roy.{Sir Henry Royce} Fl. ORIGINAL EFC1/T21.4.28. X430 X8790 X7791 MAGNETOS: Your ref. Fl/M6.4.28. We think that the difficulty with magnetos is principally that our requirements are so much more exacting than they have been in the past, for instance :- (1) We require considerably greater range than we have done before, viz. 58° for the Phantom, as compared with the old 34° for the Silver Ghost. (2) We require an enhanced degree of silence now that we have a more silent engine. Also we think that difficulties of the same order of magnitude would be found with other manufacturers, but that it may be that some could be a little better in these respects than others. We agree that the mechanical workmanship of the Watford products is good, though as before explained, we are rather dubious concerning their ability for electrical design. We also agree that the Robert Bosch is a good machine as regards performance, weight, price and reputation - we think it is possibly the best machine on electrical principle, but it does not make for silence and is more noisy than even our Watford machines - it would not meet our present standard of requirements in this direction. We have an FU.6. magneto which we can let Messrs. North have to refer to, though we do not think this will help them on the noise question. Contd. | ||