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).
Letter discussing vehicle shock absorber settings and a comparison of a proposed spring system against the Lanchester patent.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 74\1\ scan0033 | |
| Date | 12th August 1910 | |
| C.J. (2) 12th August 1910. C. If any car oscillates vertically excessively, which may be likely to bring on sea-sickness, the shock absorbers should be tightened somewhat. It is a great pity that for slow speeds the shock absorbers should be much less tight than for high speeds. Referring to the Lanchester type of springing for the rear wheels, I have looked over the Lanchester patent and find that he does not seem to claim the arrangement of his springs (which I believe were used many in carriage work), but he claims the springs in connection with double radius rods, or parallel motion, which we do not propose to use. D.{John DeLooze - Company Secretary} I should be glad if you could find out whether the New Engine Company pay a royalty to Lanchester for the springs they apply, which I think are nearer Lanchester's patent than the way we propose to apply them, because we shall have no radius rods whatever but merely use the springs to support the load to keep the axle from moving transversely. all about to the frame Yours sincerely, F H RoyceSir Henry Royce R.R. 235A (100M) (P 219. 11.7.10) E.P. 7069. | ||