Rolls-Royce Archives
         « Prev  Box Series  Next »        

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).
Comparison of power output and detonation for 116° and 110° camshafts on the 'China' engine.

Identifier  WestWitteringFiles\T\2July1929-December1929\  Scan109
Date  1st November 1929
  
To R.{Sir Henry Royce} from HS{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/ACL.
c. SS.{S. Smith}
c. Sor. E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer}
c. Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} BY.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer}

HS{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/ACL2/AD5.11.29.

x5771.
x5090.

"CHINA" ENGINE - CAMSHAFT COMPARISONS
ON THE HIGHER OUTPUT ENGINE.

We have completed a test on the China engine comparing the power output given by 116° and 110° camshafts.
The 116° camshaft has the advantage above 2600 R.P.M. The power peak is given at approx. 3200 R.P.M. giving 75 B.H.P. or 5 B.H.P. more than the maximum reading with the 110° camshaft. at 3400 R.P.M. the 116° camshaft has the advantage of 9 B.H.P. over the 110° at the same speed.

The power peak of the 110° camshaft occurs at 2850 R.P.M.

At speeds below 2600 R.P.M. the results are in favour of the 110° camshaft, (std.) to the extent at the most of 2 B.H.P.

We find the 110° camshaft is noticeably worse for detonations - on the test bed, not yet road tested - at low full throttle speeds. The compression ratio was 5.25/1. This would indicate that a higher compression ratio could be employed with the 116° to reach the same degree of low speed detonation or conversely the 110° camshaft would have to work with a lower compression ratio than permissible with the former. It therefore might be
  
  


Copyright Sustain 2025, All Rights Reserved.    whatever is rightly done, however humble, is noble
An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙