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).
Customer complaint from Major A.H. Wilkie about the performance of his Phantom II Continental car.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 18\5\ Scan022 | |
| Date | 9th January 1935 | |
| Sg.{Arthur F. Sidgreaves - MD}... from H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} Complaint case. 36-PY. - Major A.H.Wilkie. Major Wilkie called yesterday afternoon and asked for me. He tells me that he looks upon the above car, from his point of view, as a failure. He says that the maximum speed it can obtain when the engine is clean is 88 m.p.h. and that as the engine gets dirty, the maximum drops to 80. He says that seeing he was generally given to understand that we claim up to 95 m.p.h. for a P.II Continental, he is entitled to be disappointed. I took him up on this claim of 95 m.p.h. by saying I should be glad to know which official claimed more than 90 so that I could go into the matter. He then said that though in so many words the figure may not have been stated, yet the whole impression given to him in our Showrooms a year ago was that the car would do well into the nineties. It must be appreciated that Major Wilkie is an old customer and one might say an amiable critic. He is impressed daily with the acceleration and speed of the modern American cars and I told him straight out that that was a matter of power weight ratio in cars of a class with which we did not put ourselves into competition with the P.II. Of course the inevitable answer came back that few people nowadays wished to keep the same car for ten years to get the full advantage of the RR. length of life. Major Wilkie said he had sent the car in to Cricklewood where it is now, but he wondered whether it would not be better for him to make up his mind at considerable inconvenience, to send it back to the Works where he thought they were more ready to accede to an owner's request that his car should be hotted up. He asked me if he did decide to do this, whether we could and would 'hot it up' saying that he thought the policy of this question was dictated from Conduit Street. He thought possibly the compression might be slightly raised without making the engine unduly rough and noisy. At the present time, it was soft. He did not mind being able to notice a little difference, - saying there was already considerable noise from the tires and a little engine noise added should not matter. I said I would refer the question to you. H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} | ||