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).
Report concerning booming bodies and vibration complaints for car 105-GN.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 47\2\ Scan316 | |
| Date | 19th August 1930 | |
| W/S C. c. JLE{J. Lee Evans - Chassis Test Manager}, Lillie Hall. c. BA/EV.{Ivan Evernden - coachwork} c. Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} c. Wor.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} X417 EP{G. Eric Platford - Chief Quality Engineer}2/H19.8.30. re. BOOMING BODIES AND COMPLAINTS OF VIBRATIONS ETC. 105-GN. ANDERSEN. The above car was brought to our attention by Mr. Munro of Barkers at London on the 14th inst. and one certainly had to agree that the riding of this car was most disagreeable, in both the front and rear seats. The body itself was certainly a boomer type, and this was also aggravated by the large partition window which was definitely fixed. The car was also fitted with Dunlop Buttress tread tyres which had worn to a condition where they were very noisy, and, apart from bad screaming, set up bad groan periods, "Pomeroy Burton" noises, which groans and periods were aggravated by the boomy body. We were able to improve the car at least 60 or 70% by fitting plain standard tyres. This rather confirms the experience we have previously has with the present buttress tyres, that when new they are not so noisy, but after running 1,000 miles or so give trouble as above described. In discussing the matter with Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} he reports that Messrs. Dunlops point out the improvement in road gripping conditions on the Buttress tyres over the present standard tyres is only very slight. I suggest therefore, that Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} should go into this matter more fully in view of the experience we are having as above described, and let us have his recommendations. As regards body booming, it is essential that some action should be taken in the bodywork construction to reduce this tendency, which is getting worse. Against the above car we also tried the new PhantomCodename for PHANTOM I II. car for Lord Rothermere, 51-GY., which is particularly free from booming trouble and gave everyone the impression of being a very nice car. In discussing the matter with Messrs. Barkers and comparing the two cars, both of which were made by them, they pointed out that they were two distinctly different CONTD:- | ||