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).
Design specifications and dimensions for Goshawk bodies, comparing drawings from various coachbuilders.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\I\August1922\ Scan30 | |
| Date | 29th August 1922 | |
| No /4/H29.8.22. [Stamp: ORIGINAL RECEIVED SEP 6 1922] To Messrs. EH. & B.J. from R.{Sir Henry Royce} c. to Col. FW. HW. MB. c. to Mr. Ol. Ox. RE. GOSHAWK BODIES. X3730 I have hastily looked over the somewhat incomplete drawings by Barkers, and Hoopers, of open type bodies for Goshawk. I think these drawings do not give enough information i.e. go sufficiently into details. We return herewith your 2 blue prints and also send a drawing - N.sch. 1319 - showing what we now finally think should be the very maximum dimensions for an open body on Goshawk. On N.sch. 1263 we suggested that the width of the front and rear seats between the rails should be respectively 44½" and 43". As a compromise we now agree as final 45½" and 45" respectively. Would it be possible in future for drawings to be dimensioned in positions agreeing with the one we supply herewith? It would facilitate comparisons. Regarding the Barker designs there appear to be mouldings and features which to me are ugly and illogical. Hoopers avoid this, offering us a plain body which I much prefer. Regarding the inclination of the back of the front seats we think this should follow somewhat the compressed swabbing slope of say 10 to 16°. It makes more room inside the back for the feet and the tool-box, and it avoids the risk of getting the upholstery (at the back of the driver) soft at the bottom (as in Mulliners No.6.Goshawk) with a harder ridge at the top. In conclusion I believe there is only one way of dealing with this body question when it is desired to construct a number of standard ones, and that is to work to a model and not to a (1) | ||