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 to a Mr. Beaver explaining the design philosophy and history behind the springing of the Phantom II.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 16\4\ Scan221 | |
| Date | 1st December 1930 | |
| X7120 COPY TO - SG.{Arthur F. Sidgreaves - MD} COPY TO - HS.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} "ELMSTEADHenry Royce's home in West Wittering" WEST WITTERINGHenry Royce's home town CHICHESTER. ENGLAND. 1st. December 1930. X.7410. X.7520. X.235. Dear Mr. Beaver, SPRINGING OF PHANTOM 2. I am sorry to hear that you were disappointed with the riding qualities of Phantom 2. I think the explanation is that we in England have been working for somewhat different results, our roads where they permit of high speeds - being less straight and having more camber than your similar high roads. We feel the disadvantage of extra flexible springing, which is the only way to meet your desired requirements. Very flexible springing was in the earliest days a speciality of the RR. product and was originally introduced by me, not only for the riding comfort but also for saving twisting of the frame and bodywork, and so the destruction of the car body. It was especially noticeable on the earliest large cars that we built in 1905, and they swung about with a slow periodicity resembling that of a large ship, but owing to high gears and & large bodies fitted by the sales dept, these cars were not fast. The springing in those days was half or three quarter elliptic, and in the earliest times had a transverse spring at the rear. When however we made a torque tube axle it was realised that this would be much heavier to be strong enough, so we fitted cantilever springs which were much cooled. These were thought good for several reasons, but the concentration of load with very heavy cars on the ends of the spring plates introduced difficulties of lubrication, and sometimes resulted in seizing of the plates. (squeaks). About this same time we found that some of the knocking in the transmission was due to the torque combined with the vertical movement of the axle. We then wished for a parallel controlled axle in which the movement of the chassis relative to the axle did not cause any change in the speed (angular). For many years we were not able to introduce this improvement owing to the war and pressure of other work, until we introduced Phantom 2., which you will find not so exacting as regards slow running of the engine - i.e. we have removed one of the causes of the transmission knock. | ||