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).
The Phantom III wishbone arm arrangement, comparing it to Cadillac and Packard suspension systems.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 95\2\ scan0078 | |
| Date | 27th April 1936 | |
| -2- The Phantom III does largely follow the Cadillac wishbone arm arrangement, but departs from it in the location of the shock damper and coiled spring. In view of the fact that the Cadillac exposed coil spring stood up in France and the shock absorbers gave no trouble, it is difficult to know what, at the time we decided to make the change, we thought that the customer was going to get out of this altered arrangement. On the debit side we seem to find now that we are likely to be more costly and heavier than if we had stuck to the Cadillac spring and shock absorber arrangement. The only object in going into this past history is to avoid repeating any of our previous mistakes when we come to deal with the Bentley. We have a slight variation of the original Cadillac scheme on the Packard in the Experimental Dept., and it seems to us to be a sound and simple scheme. We know it gives a good ride, it cannot be costly and it is not heavy. It could be lightened by using our normal light alloy shock damper material. We think it ought to be studied in conjunction with the information already obtained from the Cadillac to see what advantages the customer can expect from the torsion rod, and whether these potential advantages justify the longer period of development which general lack of experience of torsion bars may necessitate. Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} | ||