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).
Arguments for a 3-speed gearbox over a 4-speed gearbox for car models.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 72\4\ scan0070 | |
| Date | 26th November 1923 guessed | |
| contd:- -2- (8) It would be better to make one or two less cars which are less costly and superior, than to make the few extra ones that we may otherwise lose because we only had 3 gears. (9) Our engines are more flexible than any other similar car engines in existance, they are the most powerful through the largest range of speed, therefore we ought to have less gears than anyone else. When you see the power of the EAC-1 as built you will see the facility. (10) Mr. Rowledge's views are, that he was a 3 speed advocate Sales at Wolseley's or Napier's converted him to 4 speeds but now in these days of low gear direct drive, he, like myself is quite content to be without the usual 2nd. gear of a 4 speed box, i.e. top gear for all work - even on well engineered mountain roads - 1 in 14, a useful gear for 1 in 8 gradient, and a ditching gear 1 in 4. (11) The usal 4 speed box is confusing, and generally requires more changes - hill out of Dover for instance. (12) One of the worst features of a 4 speed and reverse is that you must have five places on your gate. It involves an external gate and a change speed lever with reverse stop, taking up more body room and increasing the cost of this item 10 times, because a very simple internal gate only is needed for 3 speeds. (13) I admit that it is myself who has constantly advocated 3 speeds since 1918 when we started to gear the cars much lower on top gear, so that Sales are not changing, but pressing obstinately for their original wishes. (14) The above points I should like putting before the directors, for their information at the next meeting, but it is probable that I shall not be there to give any support for my views, but I think they should take the responsibility, and know the views of their engineer. R.{Sir Henry Royce} | ||