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).
Proposal for a 10,000-mile test of a Phantom II in France to evaluate engine mountings, frame stiffness, and new pistons.
| Identifier | Morton\M19\ img176 | |
| Date | 20th May 1931 | |
| R.{Sir Henry Royce} from Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} c. Eg. c. WCr. I. c. Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} Ry. PHANTOM II 10,000 MILE TEST IN FRANCE. It is proposed to send a Phantom II car to France in order to try out there that the car will remain satisfactory with the rear engine feet removed. This test is being undertaken in order to standardise this method of overcoming customers complaints of booms. We have treated 6 cars in this way and in all cases we have satisfied the customer as regards absence of boom. The car will be fitted up so that the standard four engine feet can be connected up at any time so that comparisons can be made with and without rear engine feet. We should also like at the same time for this car to take the necessary parts with it so that the diamond engine mounting could also be compared for likely troubles over bad roads. To be useful this test will have to start as soon as possible as we already have customers cars running about with the rear engine feet removed. The scheme of diamond mounting which we have prepared and which could be tried on this car is to L.C. 2873. We are carrying out the test you suggested of measuring the twist of the frame with various loads and with different engine fixings. These are practically complete but we wish to get the average of several cars. The results show that removing the rear engine feet the frame is definitely less stiff but is practically the same as Phantom I in which we had three point mounting with diabolo rubber rear feet. The other features we wish to get on this car are as follows :- Pistons with longer skirts. These have already been standardised but this test will offer a good opportunity to confirm that they are an improvement over the present standard. | ||