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 cooling system volumes and performance against competitor vehicles like Pierce Arrow and Graham Paige.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\U\August1930-November1930\ Scan025 | |
| Date | 25th August 1931 | |
| -2- our cooling systems compared with other cars. TOP WATER TANK VOLUME. We have very much less top water tank space per gallon of cooling water carried than the Pierce Arrow, Chrysler or Marmon. Actually, the water carried per 100 cu.ins. top tank volume per car is :- 25 HP. R.R. - 2 gal. 40/50 R.R. - 1.94 gal. Chrysler -1.26 gal. Pierce Arrow -1.05 gal. We think that we might with advantage extend our top tanks backward under the bonnet. PERFORMANCE. As we should expect, the Marmon and Pierce Arrow can excel the 40/50 in low speed acceleration due to their very low top gears but the high wear and tear and poor petrol consumption they thereby incur does not make them a very practical proposition. The pleasantest car was the Graham Paige. By means of a long stroke they manage to give 4730 c.c. for £30 tax against our 3670 c.c. for £26 tax i.e. a 15 4/10 % difference in tax 34% difference in displacement, and were it not for the fact that the chassis must be rather heavy the car would have a remarkable performance being only 127" wheel base. It is refreshing to get back to a high top gear with the consequent absence of fuss, and the 3rd. speed acceleration is of course reasonably good, 55 m.p.h. being reached on this gear in comfort. We think that the Graham Paige have cleverly exploited the obsolete R.A.C. rating formula and | ||