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).
Design and cost implications of different radiator types, including Chromium plated and loose shell versions.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 149a\2\ scan0113 | |
| Date | 23th January 1933 | |
| 834561. To Wor.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} From Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}5/MJ.23.1.33. Re. Radiators. Sg.{Arthur F. Sidgreaves - MD}1/E18.1.33. (att. to Works Copy) As the question of costs has been raised by Sg.{Arthur F. Sidgreaves - MD} we think very likely you would like to reply to his memo. Our information is that Springfield certainly produced cars with loose shells which were similar in appearance to our present standard cars, i.e. they had the rectangular section tanks. The car which Oy. brought over here was made this way. Their chief reason for producing the radiator that way was to enable them to produce a Chromium plated radiator. As you are aware we produced a number of Chromium plated radiators before we produced Staybright without loose shells. The point at the discussion at Derby which I raised was that if it could be agreed to use a modified shape of radiator tank, that is with rounded corners, the tank could be pressed and not built up from separate sheets as we have to do now and as Springfield had to do in the case of their loose shell. We think it may be found that making our present design of radiator with a loose shell and having it Chromium plated instead of Staybright would not effect any great saving. We have the Bensport radiator which is the loose shell type and the design is such that it should enable it to be pressed. Perhaps if the Works could get out the price of the Bensport radiator compared with the present standard one it might be helpful. Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} | ||