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).
Confidential memo discussing future product strategy concerning engine size, gearing, and performance.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 65a\3\ scan0276 | |
| Date | 1st March 1931 | |
| Secret and Confidential. To H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} From Cg. The idea of course of being able to use the same parts such as cylinder head, cylinders, valves etc. etc. for both chassis is very attractive but, unless this were found feasible to a considerable extent, the benefit gained in that would not be sufficiently great to cause us to make a car with a larger size engine than we consider really necessary. I do not think we need anything larger than a 8-litre. On this question of a 12 cylinder the first important step seems to be to buy one and /you will have received memos. recommending the purchase of a 12-cylinder Cadillac, which I understand is a 6.3 litre car. We could get delivery of one of these very quickly and we could also make sure that Oy., who, you know, is with the Cadillac people, would make sure that we got a thoroughly satisfactory and representative model of the type. You refer in your telegram received about the same date as your letter to high revolutions bringing almost insurmountable difficulties and recommending a higher back axle gear ratio. On the former point you will see that we ought not to admit that high revolutions are impossible because of what we know our competitors have done, and in regard to a higher gear we feel that this would be a retrograde move because it would decrease our acceleration, which after all was one of the main advantages claimed for the Phantom II when first introduced, and here again we must remember that, when on H's visit to America he was asked to demonstrate the points of improvement on the P.II as compared with the P.I, the results showed that the acceleration performance from a standing start of their P.I was even better than the P.II. Yourletter and telegram also refer to the necessity of a double top as early as possible, and on this point you will remember that I have been saying for 12 or 18 months that we must have an easy change scheme at the earliest possible moment. | ||