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).
Performance and continued experimentation of Phantom and Pedestal type pistons.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\Q\January1927-March1927\ 110 | |
| Date | 28th February 1927 | |
| TO HS.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} By RG{Mr Rowledge} FROM R.{Sir Henry Royce} (At Le CanadelHenry Royce's French residence.) Copy to BJ. WOR.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} Br.{T. E. Bellringer - Repair Manager} ORIGINAL REC'D & DESPATCHED FROM WW. 3.3.27. PHANTOM PISTONS - ADDITIONAL SAW NICK AND PEDESTAL TYPE X8040 X3666 Car pistons seem to be going fairly well: the pedestal ones on 7-EX. appear to me faultless, making no noise and using extremely little oil. If there are any changes to make from these I should not adopt the extra saw cut suggested by HS{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Lovesey. To me it is not sufficiently logical, and it introduces other weaknesses. I should prefer that we continued to experiment rather than run the risk of making a small fault into a weakness. Springfield say a longer piston was better with them. I suggest a clearance band might help to make two beddings apart rather than one. I think however there are so many things that can possibly make a small noise that one fears we are deceived - i.e. rings side play, little end side play, want of balance, etc. So go on experimenting until we are sure of the cause of these small occasional noises. This does not seem a serious or urgent question, but we should go on at once testing further pistons of the pedestal type. R.{Sir Henry Royce} | ||