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).
Criticisms and faults found on the body of the first Bentley 50.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 111\1\ scan0083 | |
| Date | 10th May 1938 | |
| SECRET To Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} from Da{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}/Ev.{Ivan Evernden - coachwork} c.c to EY. Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} Hn.{F. C. Honeyman - Retail orders} Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/FD.{Frank Dodd - Bodies} Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/IMW.{Ivan M. Waller - Head of Chateauroux} [text crossed out] Da{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}/Ev.{Ivan Evernden - coachwork}12/G.10.5.38. S 04. RE: BODY FOR THE FIRST BENTLEY 50. (1.B.50.) For conference tomorrow [handwritten] As a result of criticisms received during the preliminary mounting of this body Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/FD.{Frank Dodd - Bodies} and the writer have made an inspection, and would like to record their criticisms of the following points :- (1). The panels of the doors, the rear boot and above the wheel arch are very wavy, causing very distorted images. This is very noticeable. (2). The paint work on the rear boot is badly scratched with fine scratches, although we are assured that the body was not covered by a terpaulin during its transit to Derby. The paint work is cracked around the cornice over the nearside quarter light, and on the door hinges the paintwork is badly finished giving the appearance of having been chipped off and re-painted. (3). You will recollect that we have previously criticised the cantilever brackets for the body mounting extending inwards from the body bottom sides. When the weight of the body was taken on these during the mounting it was observed that the bottom side was twisted. Such brackets from the bottom side might be permissible if they were not being attached to the chassis frame by one bolt with rubber mounting. (4). Although we sent to the coachbuilders a drawing of our sheet metal dash and explained that the face of the scuttle should be flanged to a width that would enable us to bolt our dash to it, this has not been done, and the mounting of the body is held up until a wider flange has been welded to the scuttle face. The face of the scuttle is not flat, but has a very pronounced dish inwards in the vertical plane. We have tested the dashboard pressing and find this to be correct. (5). It is noticed that on the door shuts, both front and rear, no seal of the American type has been provided on the outside of the shut to prevent wind noise. Yet such an external seal has been provided to the top of the doors. The finish of this latter appears rather below standard. | ||