Rolls-Royce Archives
         « Prev  Box Series  Next »        

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).
Comparison of cooling system specifications and performance against competitor vehicles like Pierce Arrow, Chrysler, and Graham Paige.

Identifier  ExFiles\Box 5a\5\  05-page125
Date  25th March 1930
  
-2- Ne/Rs.{Sir Henry Royce's Secretary}7/Hl.25.3.30.Contd.

were not the bonnet louvres the only means of escape for
the air. The results indicate that we are well up in the
dimensions of our cooling system compared with other cars.
TOP WATER TANK VOLUME.
We have very much less top water tank space per
gallon of cooling water than the Pierce Arrow, Chrysler
or Marmon.
Actually the water carried per 100 cu.ins. top tank
volume per car is :-
25 HP. R.R. - 2 gal. 40/50 R.R. - 1.94 gal.
Chrysler - 1.28 gal. Pierce Arrow - 1.88 gal.
We think that we might with advantage, extend our
top tanks backward under the bonnet.
PERFORMANCE.
As we should expect, the Marmon and Pierce Arrow
can excel the 40/50 in low speed acceleration due to their
very low top gears but the high wear and tear and poor petrol
consumption they thereby incur does not make them a very
practical proposition. The pleasantest car was the Graham
Paige. By means of a long stroke they manage to give 4730
c.c. for £30 tax against our 3670 c.c. for £26 tax i.e. 15½%
difference in tax 34½% difference in displacement, and were
it not for the fact that the chassis must be rather heavy
the car would have a remarkable performance being only 121"
wheel base. It is refreshing to get back to a high top
gear with the consequent absence of fuss, and the 3rd. speed
acceleration is of course remarkably good, 55 m.p.h. being
  
  


Copyright Sustain 2025, All Rights Reserved.    whatever is rightly done, however humble, is noble
An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙