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).
Urging the adoption of the P & R BD.11 battery for the 40/50 chassis, comparing it to the standard Exide batteries.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 38\5\ Scan280 | |
| Date | 23th November 1922 | |
| 27b Derby. X.3398 PN{Mr Northey}5/DN/23.11.22. TO J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} FROM PN.{Mr Northey} P & R BD.{Mr Berend}11 BATTERY FOR 40/50 CHASSIS COMPARED WITH PRESENT STANDARD EXIDES. The attached memo EFC2/T21.11.22 has been written in reply to certain queries I put to EFC. arising out of my conversation with you on this matter quite recently. You will observe that although a number of most important points are given where the P. & R.{Sir Henry Royce} battery has a distinct advantage over certain other types, that its weight is not greater than that of the Exide batteries we are now using, but that its capacity is considerably greater, especially for heavy discharge work such as is necessary when one of our engines has to be started up cold in the winter months. Many features in the battery combine to give this result and I am of opinion that it is of the greatest importance that this battery be not turned down. R's idea appears to be chiefly that of trying to save weight. Directly you save weight on this battery, you are cutting out the advantages enumerated. From a sales point of view, I strongly urge the adoption of the P. & R.{Sir Henry Royce} battery. P.N. Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} RECEIVED NOV 24 1922 | ||