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).
Cause of an over-oiling issue on the Phantom III model, with handwritten comments.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 131\4\ scan0347 | |
| Date | 5th July 1937 | |
| Handwritten Top: Mx.{John H Maddocks - Chief Proving Officer} what do you think of Hancocks views. Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} Routing: To Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} from Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/GWH.{George W. Hancock - Head Chateauroux} C. Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} Location & Date: Levallois July 5th.1937 Typed Content: Re. PHANTOM III. Over-oiling on the Continent. This trouble is now non-existent on the Continent. In view of this, I would like to state that in my opinion the carrying out of the modifications to the valve guides is not necessary and is a needless expense. I do not make this statement rashly, as throughout the whole of the trouble I have felt convinced that the cause was oil passing the piston rings and not top over-oiling. On all Phantom III where they have been given a chance to do some mileage in the country, this trouble has not occurred. The car in Paris has not given trouble after fitting the K.L.G. FE.30.X. plugs and has had a fast run to Deippe and back. The exhaust smoke after idling which we had at the commencement was due to oil from the rockers. The conflicting results which Mx.{John H Maddocks - Chief Proving Officer} obtained with consumptions was in my opinion the same as I am up against here with the Bentleys i.e. the fit of pistons and effect of rings. Continual running of the car improved the consumption, viz, bedding of the rings and not due so much to fine clearances of the guides. If I am wrong in my opinion, there will shortly be many recurrent cases of over-oiling. Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/GWH.{George W. Hancock - Head Chateauroux} Handwritten Bottom: I do not agree. in the case of P III that the main cause of the trouble is as GWH{George W. Hancock - Head Chateauroux} says. There is abundant evidence to the contrary. Neither do I agree that I obtained conflicting results. AR | ||