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).
Pros and cons of oil-operated versus vacuum-operated gearbox remote control systems.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 136\2\ scan0108 | |
| Date | 13th June 1939 | |
| 1153 To Sg.{Arthur F. Sidgreaves - MD} from Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/Gry.{Shadwell Grylls} c. Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} c. By.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} c. Cx.{Major Len W. Cox - Advertising Manager} W/S. c. C. W/S. c. Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} c. Da{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}/Hdy.{William Hardy} c. MX.{John H Maddocks - Chief Proving Officer} Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/Gry.{Shadwell Grylls}6/MH.{M. Huckerby}13.6.39. GEARBOX REMOTE CONTROL. We were asked at the last Conference to put on paper the pros and cons of oil operated and vacuum operated change speed. It is assumed that in either case the remote control will be on the steering column or instrument board and not merely an arrangement for decreasing the effort of the present side change mechanism. The advantages of vacuum operation are: (i) We have already tried it on 35.EX and as clutch assistance on C's car. (2) Other people use it. The advantages of oil operation are: (a) It works when the throttle is open which vacuum does not. (b) The sideways movement of the lever will be lighter than usual (but heavier with vacuum). (c) Elimination of clonking experienced on 35.EX. (d) Easier to operate should the relay assistance fail. (e) Is likely to be more durable. (f) It weighs less than the vacuum arrangement. | ||