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).
Review of magnetos from various manufacturers for the Phantom Chassis.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\S\March1928-May1928\ Scan127 | |
| Date | 23th April 1928 | |
| To R.{Sir Henry Royce} from EFC. c. BJ. E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} c. Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} C. c. SG.{Arthur F. Sidgreaves - MD} EY ORIGINAL PHANTOM CHASSIS MAGNETOS. X8790 Various magnetos of other makes have been considered from time to time as follows :- M.L. In August 1925 the M.L. Co. were provided with our General Specification of Magneto Performance (without automatic advance), together with an enquiry as to whether they could supply a magneto to comply with that Specification. Their answer was that they could comply with the exception of the range in which they could only give 40°, whereas we required 58°. The matter therefore was dropped. B.T.H. At the end of 1925 we had B.T.H. magnetos type FM.6. for test. The reasons these were dropped were :- (1) Their range was only 30°. (2) They were sleeve magnetos and would therefore be subject to the same faults as our then present standard. Conner. Some considerable time ago we had a Conner magneto for test and we were somewhat impressed with their patented means of regulating the flux distortion for high and low speed performance. This always appeared to be both in principle and result to be a good method. At the same time we concluded with the Conner Company we were asking for a magneto with automatic advance. Later of course we altered our specification to suit our requirements for magnetos without automatic advance, and we have not approached the Conner Co. since that time. We think it might be worth while again to do so. R.{Sir Henry Royce} Bosch. Comparatively recently we have had the latest Bosch type FU.6. machine. This was fully reported upon in our EFC3/T2.11.27. The machine was subsequently sent to S.W. and later returned to us, and is still awaiting an endurance test when the present Watford EW.6. magneto endurance test is completed. Despite the fact that the magneto was somewhat noisy, | ||