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).
Correspondence page from 'The Autocar' magazine featuring reader letters on various motoring and general interest topics.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 160\5\ scan0236 | |
| Date | 28th February 1941 | |
| PUBLICITY FILE - 1378 February 28th, 1941 The Autocar 199 Correspondence ARMY DRIVERS A Strong Complaint Recorded [50000.]—Being a despatch rider for a railway company, and doing some 140 miles a day, I feel I must write to ask if something cannot be done about the disgusting behaviour of these Army drivers. I have already two of my pals in hospital through no fault of their own. The other night when I was going home one lorry came so close to me that I thought I should have to drive on to the pavement; instead I pulled up. I have been driving for the last twenty years with a clean licence. Why should we have to put up with this? Cannot the police do something? F.{Mr Friese} W. Wembley, Middlesex. [The subject of the large number of road accidents in which military vehicles have been involved has recently been ventilated, and strong disciplinary measures have been promised against offending drivers. Also, it was stated last week that military patrols were being instituted in certain areas to keep a check on the speed of Service vehicles. We do not doubt our correspondent's cause for complaint. But our own not inconsiderable experience, it must be said, includes few instances in recent months of definitely bad or inconsiderate driving by those in charge of Service vehicles.—ED.{J. L. Edwards}] THE HUMAN TOUCH Humour in a Church Carving? [50001.]—The remarkable piece of carving of which I enclose a photograph is on one of the stone pillars in the beautiful church at Bere Regis, Dorset. It is very lifelike, and seems to say “Oh, my head!” I think it must have been the carver's idea to portray a man with a headache. A DURHAM READER. Low Coniscliffe, Co. Durham. THE LIGHTS THAT WENT OUT Thermal Effect Suggested as the Explanation of a Temporary Failure [50002.]—With reference to the electrical problem mentioned in “Disconnected Jottings” (page 103 of your issue of January 31st), I should be interested to learn whether the following explanation can account for the observed phenomena. The electric point used for the shelter radiator was installed for an electric iron. The unusually heavy current passed by the radiator element may therefore cause a considerable temperature rise at the wall point, which possibly serves as a junction box for the lights on the same circuit. If this is so, then any poor connection at the point is likely to be adversely affected by expansion of the metal parts concerned, and may result in extinction of the lights as described. Some such thermal effect seems to be the only possible explanation of the time-lag observed. S. J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} Northwich. [It was described that an electric radiator having been in use for some time, the lights in other rooms served by the same circuit went out of action, not returning to normal until several hours after the radiator had been switched off. “The Scribe” is grateful for several somewhat similar explanations offered by other readers.—ED.{J. L. Edwards}] APPROACHING 50 M.P.G. Hints on Improving an Already Good Consumption Figure on an 8 h.p. Car [50003.]—Your correspondent “Medico” [49981] asks for advice regarding improving petrol consumption of a Standard Eight (already exceeding 40 m.p.g., he says). If he, or any other interested owner, cares to adopt the following procedure it will probably save much time and trouble in experimenting. First, the ignition system should be thoroughly gone over, plug gaps carefully set, contacts cleaned and adjusted, and the timing checked. On my engine a slightly advanced ignition setting was possible without detonation. Tappets should be checked with the gauge provided. The carburettor should be dismantled and carefully cleaned. Examine the choke tube, which will probably be found to be size 19. Substitute size 19 if this is not so and fit an 80 main jet and a 210 correction jet, paying very special attention to all petrol joints on reassembly. If “Medico” then fits a Cox Atmos petrol economiser he will find that on a long run over give-and-take roads, and employing coasting procedure where possible, his consumption will approach 50 m.p.g. This naturally assumes that he is easy on the acceleration, does not change down without need, and keeps his tyre pressures well up. On my car, a tourer, a “speedometer” 60 m.p.h. is still obtainable under reasonably favourable conditions, and top gear climbing seems unaffected. Acceleration has suffered. I should like to add that I am in no way connected with Cox Atmos Products, Ltd.; in fact, I had been working along similar lines and only afterwards discovered that this fitment was purchasable. H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} LAUGHLIN. Ilford, Essex. “TALKING OF SPORTS CARS” A Subject Which Has Developed [50004.]—I wonder if this Bentley-Bugatti “blitz” is going on for the duration! Starting as a comparison, this discussion has developed, in my opinion, into “an all-in affair,” “no holds barred.” When Mr. J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} P. Bennett [49919] compared another car’s performance with the 8-litre, Mr. Lycett replied, rather sarcastically, that better figures at Shelsley Walsh were due to a more expert driver, and also suggested the 3½-litre car as being inferior to his own, remarking: “If Mr. Hall’s car is in existence.” As “Omega” [49974] points out, if it is not the circuit, it is the driver, or the car is not suitable, when comparison is made with Mr. Lycett’s Bentley. “Omega” adds that he has owned, or had access to, all the old-type Bentleys and admits they were marvellous cars in their day. It boils down to the fact that Mr. Lycett’s 8-litre Bentley is a fine car, but it is an out-and-out special, which must have cost a mint of money to build. F.{Mr Friese} H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} TEMPEST. Manningham, Bradford. The Bentley-Bugatti Controversy [50005.]—I am afraid that my last letter [49985] on the Bentley-Bugatti discussion looked terribly long when i appeared in print; but having remained silent for so many weeks there was much to be said. Incidentally, the wording “improved invincibility” should have been “unproved invincibility.” The reason for this further letter is to give whole-hearted support to two of your correspondents, viz., “Omega” and Mr. A.{Mr Adams} L. Marsh, who, in their letters [49974] in the issue of February 7th and [49986] in the issue of February 14th respectively, admirably expressed Mr. Lycett’s attitude throughout the present discussion. Mr. Lycett should study those two letters, as such expressions [Image Caption] A grotesque and not unamusing carving—though humour may not have been intended—in Bere Regis church, Dorset, mentioned in letter No. 50001 above. A 21 | ||