Rolls-Royce Archives
         « Prev  Box Series  Next »        

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).
Standardisation and fitting issues of a side wheel carrier for the 40/50 model.

Identifier  WestWitteringFiles\J\May1923\  Scan5
Date  9th May 1923
  
F.R. 235A (100 T) (S.H. 159, 11-8-20) G.{Mr Griffiths - Chief Accountant / Mr Gnapp} 2800
ORIGINAL
TO HS.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} FROM DA.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}
DA{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}2/M9.5.23.

RE. RR. SIDE WHEEL CARRIER ON 40/50. X3633

Sales are very anxious to standardise this carrier and we understand are prepared to put through an order for a considerable number of sets for sale to the coachbuilders. They have asked for certain modifications as compared with the one on 6.EX, that is to say, they want the wheel turned with the cone side outwards, and have fixed certain positions with reference to the dash which suit the coachwork on the different steerings. When we set this out we find that it is impossible to get on a carrier of the same type as the Goshawk without fouling the oil tank.

We do not think we have sufficient authority to remove the oil tank until we have discussed it with Mr. Royce, but we are inclined to think that he will agree to do so. We know that you got this carrier on 6.EX. but we cannot remember exactly the position in which the wheels were, or how you dealt with the oil tank. We should be very much obliged if you would send us information on these points.

Could you give us the longitudinal position of the two wheels with reference to the back of the dashboard, and the transverse positions say with reference to the corner of the dash, together with the height from the bottom of the running board.

We think this matter is urgent in view of Sales attitude.

DA.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}
  
  


Copyright Sustain 2025, All Rights Reserved.    whatever is rightly done, however humble, is noble
An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙