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).
Feedback from coachbuilders on recommendations for the Phantom III bodywork.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 92\1\ scan0245 | |
| Date | 16th March 1936 | |
| x304 E/Ev.{Ivan Evernden - coachwork}1/MN.16.3.36. To Hm.{Capt. W. Hallam - Head Repairs} [text has been struck through] Copy to E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} L.A. [text has been struck through] Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} [text has been struck through] He/Pr.{Percy H. Rose} [text has been struck through] Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} [handwritten initials] Phantom III Recommendations to Coachbuilders. We have read with interest the replies to your circular letter of our leading Coachbuilders asking for their criticisms of our special features for Phantom III coachwork, as enumerated in our booklet, and tested on 32-EX. It would appear that the general consensus of opinion is favourable, and that it is agreed that our recommendations for strengthening the body conform to their experience. There is a universal belief that weight will be increased anything from one to three cwts., and that there will be a corresponding increase in cost. In the case of Messrs. Thrupp & Maberly the suggestion is that there is little need for this increased strength in view of their present cheaper and simpler methods of manufacture having proved satisfactory. Strangely enough, as you pointed out, Messrs. Park Ward & Co. are the only people who are definitely opposed to our recommendations, stating that they believe the body to be too heavily ironed, and that the metal we have put in does no useful work, but merely adds weight. In view of the large amount of co-operation which has taken place between themselves and ourselves, and their greater knowledge of our recommendations, this state of affairs is most surprising. They also believe the weights of the bodies will go up, and quote the weights of four experimental Phantom III bodies which they have built. These weights to us appear to be no greater, and in a way slightly less than those of corresponding bodies on Phantom III. It is not strictly correct of them to say that they have no real opportunity of inspecting bodies on Phantom III built by themselves to our instruction, in as much as Mr. Ward has twice, atleast, been to Derby and inspected the body of 32-EX. | ||