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).
Explaining discrepancies between two suspension tests for the 40/50 model.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 16\7\ Scan103 | |
| Date | 17th September 1928 | |
| x7410 To DA.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} from Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rml/T17.9.28. 40/50 SUSPENSION. +8210 We regret that we have not previously answered your DAL/M10.9.28 but we have been away from the Works. The apparent discrepancy between tests 1 and 5 does not really exist and is due to lack of information on the blue print. Test 1, as you will see from the report accompanying the chart was run with rear springs that had seen 6 months service and had a difference between up and down loading of about 250 lbs. due to friction. In Test 5, the rear springs were cadmium plated and well greased, additionally the front springs with 19% reduced rating were utilised (see report). Therefore from the figure of 45 in test 1, we reduce 15 for tyre pressures as shown in test 2, the remaining 10 being the result of the alteration to the front and rear springs. We attach an amended blue print. Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} | ||