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).
Body dimensions and design for the Goshawk 11 model, comparing sizes and suggesting alternatives.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 41\3\ Scan018 | |
| Date | 7th May 1921 | |
| R.R. 25A (100 T) (5b 78S3) 2-4018 From R.{Sir Henry Royce} c. to CJ. c. to LHS.{Lord Herbert Scott} c. to PN.{Mr Northey} c. to C. c. to Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} c. to BY.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} X3730 RL/G7.5.21. X.3730 - RE GOSHAWK 11 BODY. x297 With reference to your report of the body at Mulliners on the 29th. ult. my impression is that with the economical shape and the increased dimensions given in your memo. the body would be too large. We sent you on the 5th. instant, our impressions of what we think the new body should be like. You will notice that we have made it 108" long, which we understand is the length of the landaulet, not 109". We find the body at 108" etc. to our dimensions is actually ¾" longer in the back than 6.EX. Regarding the width, our impression is that 41" minimum is sufficient for the driver at the seat level, but at the elbows where little or no padding is needed, the dimension should be 43" minimum. You will notice also that we have concluded that the body was entirely spoilt for accommodation through the curving inwards of the sides and the back. Had the same width and length been used, and to finish with vertical lines, as is necessary in an enclosed body, the seating capacity would have been satisfactory, especially had the back of the front seat been inclined to follow the cushion, as was carried out in Park Wards' and other bodies. This latter would have made ample leg room for the back passengers. Probably the two features making a difference of 6". I am afraid that there must be some very careful finessing of dimensions of bodies for these small models, (Goshawk and Swallow). Wolseley and others do so very carefully, grading the sizes as the H.P. and weight of chassis is reduced:- I have suggested elsewhere:- 40/50 H.P. - 100% } 20 H.P. - 95 or 96% } linear 15 H.P. - 92 or 93% } dimensions. R.{Sir Henry Royce} | ||