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).
Piston design comparing it to the Bently type and why certain features cannot be adopted.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 77\1\ scan0024 | |
| Date | 29th December 1919 | |
| X.3774 Extract from Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}5/LG29.12.19. X.2748. - RE PISTONS. X. 3754. X. 3732. X. 3774. ------ ---------- ------- ------- ------- X.3774. - The proportions of our piston and connecting rod do not lend themselves to the Bently type of spring piston: the gudgeon pin boss being so low down, there is not room to get the flexible band in the bottom of the piston like what is used on the Bently pistons. It would be no use extending the skirt of the piston to get this flexible band on because our piston already extends out at the bottom of the stroke. I spoke to Capt. Bently about this piston recently in London and he said that our proportions would make it difficult to obtain the best results. We are sending a drawing of a standard piston to see what they can recommend. | ||