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).
The performance of electrical parts after a 10,000-mile run on a 2.EX car.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\D\April1920\ Scan16 | |
| Date | 20th April 1920 | |
| To EFC. from Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} ORIGINAL HsG/LG20.4.20. X.364Ya ELECTRICAL PARTS RUN 10,000 MILES ON 2.EX CAR. X.3748 1. X.60Y X.3619 Battery. The Battery on this car failed after approx. 7000 miles. We notice that you have taken the cells apart to ascertain the cause of it. We certainly do not recommend that we should adopt the smaller size battery for our standard cars. As this battery failed on the 10,000 miles test, it will be necessary, in any case, to run a further test before it could be adopted. 2. X.2656 X.3082 C.M.3. Brushes on Starter Motor. The Starter Motor equipment did not give any trouble during the whole of the run. The Commutator and brushes appeared to be in excellent condition. We recommend that the C.M.3. brushes are adopted as standard. The Starter Motor has not been lubricated during the run or touched in any way. 3. X.3129 X.2572 X.2894 X.186 Battery Ignition. Trouble was experienced on the battery ignition due to a faulty connection on the earthed side of the condenser. It was sometime before the fault was found. At first the car was running on tungsten contacts, and Maddocks thought that most probably they were the cause of the trouble. After the platinum contacts had been fitted, they still gave trouble owing to the points burning away after a very short run. When the connection for the condenser had been made satisfactory the car gave no further trouble. We recommend that some improvements should be made for a permanent connection on the condenser. 4. X.3778 X.3448 Coil. Although the coil has given no trouble, we do not Contd. | ||