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).
Suitability of a worm drive versus a double bevel back axle.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 2\6\ B002_X 140 141 157-page114 | |
| Date | 2nd March 1911 | |
| S.R. 3332-(1000) (W G). 10.2.11 S.P. & Co. 2nd March 1911 <u>Worm drive and double bevel back axle.</u> C.J. 2/3/11 EH/DES11 With reference to the Lanchester car and the worm drive, I am still of the opinion that the bevel will suit us best considering the power of our engine and the speed at which our car is expected to travel. Before making so serious a departure inroducing the worm drive, I think it would be quite worth while to try the <u>double bevel back axle</u> which will <u>interchange</u> with our 1600 back axle, so that there would not be a very radical departure in our chassis, if we should find it an easier axle to get quiet, (which I think may be the case, owing to the sub-division of the pressure.) We could change this only the worm drive wants a new scheme altogether. X141 | ||