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).
Difference in piston pinning practices between the American (Springfield) and Derby factories.
| Identifier | Morton\M7\ img043 | |
| Date | 28th November 1922 | |
| TO- BJ. FROM R.{Sir Henry Royce} c. to CJ. HS.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} BA. c. to BY.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} EP.{G. Eric Platford - Chief Quality Engineer} OY. ORIGINAL RRLA. HO/SO R3/M28.11.22. DERBY RR/A Inc RE. AMERICAN PRACTICE. X2748 X3666 X.741 Co EX. file We learn from EP.{G. Eric Platford - Chief Quality Engineer} that Springfield have ceased to pin the pistons. It has been our practice ever since we made cars to pin the piston rings to prevent all the joints getting opposite one another, and to prevent joints getting in the wrong place. They should definitely be on that side of the piston where the piston presses on the cylinder wall due to the angularity of the connecting rod. They should also alternate from side to side only varying from the exact right angles to the piston pin sufficient to break the joint. If they are not using the orthodox split rings in America then there may be some excuse for not pinning them, but even this practice would be wrong, because they should have been submitted to Derby. We must have all the cars built to the same designs and practice, and details of manufacture. R.{Sir Henry Royce} | ||