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).
Vehicle body life and weight, comparing different coachbuilders and construction methods based on road trials.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 67\1\ scan0175 | |
| Date | 10th May 1926 guessed | |
| (3) BODY LIFE. It has been our experience before the use of subframe bodies on the 10,000 miles trials in France that no body ever stood the test without either becoming so cracked to pieces as to be almost useless, or else actually delaying the test whilst it has been repaired and made safe. 8-EX. and 10.G.3. have completed between them 20,000 odd miles, both bodies are in good condition and suitable for further service, only needing minor adjustments. 10.G.3. being a cabriolet de ville is a fundamentally weak body in itself and affords a good test. 7-EX. Barker-Beaton all-weather with over 7,000 miles to its credit in South France has stood up reasonably well - see separate report to Barkers. BODY WEIGHTS. With the orthodox system of mounting, bodyweights have been gradually but persistently becoming heavier, due to increased acceleration and retardation, and higher speeds over bad roads. The body is excessively ironed with steel plates .375" thick to enable it to reinforce the chassis frame and so reduce the deflections of it to a minimum. This it cannot do for long: it is a house built on the sands. The mentality and conservatism of the coachbuilders has to be overcome before we can make them realise that because a subframe body is relieved of the racking of the main frame, there is not the need for the excessive ironing of the super-structure. Messrs Barkers have done something in this respect, and our 10.G.3. is the same weight as Mr. Nutt's trials car, two exactly similar bodies. (Weighed by HS.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}) By the judicial use of sheet metal gussets we see no reason why we should not easily produce subframe bodies the same weight or lighter than our present productions. In scientific construction the younger coachbuilders are rapidly advancing before the classis coachbuilders. An example is to be seen in the case of 5.G.2. and 7-EX., both Beaton all-weather bodies, the former by Young & Co. Bromley constructed largely to our design, and the latter by Barker & Co. In the case of 8-EX., GF-66., and EAC. 1. we were not able to do the weight saving we might have done as in order to speed up the delivery we took over stock bodies. | ||