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).
Costs, savings, and production considerations for various car body shells.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 117\1\ scan0226 | |
| Date | 13th August 1938 | |
| -3- If it is all in the dies which can be bought for £1,000, then why not buy dies for B.111, which if it then costs the same per lb. as B.50, will give a material price for the shell of £15.6.0. + £4. tool cost or £19.6.0., a saving of £5.11.0. per B.111 shell. The same argument would seem to apply to B.11, as £20. per shell the material cost of which is £66., is easily recoverable judging by what the dies do on B.50. However it probably is not fair to bring this body into the argument as it was made under a different regime. Taking the labour figures. Let us assume that they are correct but that Park Wards are not making any B.50 bodies but only the 250 B.111 bodies. By cutting their labour from £38.3.4. on B.2. to £18.12.0½. the amount of money allotted to overheads is halved. But why should the actual overheads be halved since many of them such as rent, show room, rates and depreciation must be fixed charges. In other words, if Park Wards do not make appreciably more B.111 bodies than they did B.2 but only manufacture in bigger batches with reduced labour cost, we do not see how they can maintain their overheads at 100% unless they cut their fixed charges in half. We have heard no suggestions of this being done and of course if it can be done there is no need to wait for large orders to put the economies into operation. With regard to Manning's views, he will give these to you himself when he comes to Derby. It appears, however, that with a tool cost of £50,000 he does not think that he can produce a body shell to the standard that we should require for appreciably less than £42. exclusive of tool charges. He pointed out that the competitive figure for the same shell with £1,000's worth of tools was less than this, and he immediately said it could not be done. He pointed out that Daimlers are spending £7.10.0 per body (Park Ward's total labour figure is £11.10.11½. ) rectifying the result of bad pressings and that they spent many thousands on tools. Also that Jaguars for the same reason are having to fill up their defects with 50 lbs. of solder per body. He mentioned many cases of the same kind that had come to his notice in the States. | ||