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).
Correspondence page from 'The Autocar' magazine featuring reader letters on various automotive topics.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 160\5\ scan0292 | |
| Date | 21th March 1941 | |
| 260 The Autocar March 21st, 1941 CORRESPONDENCE OPINIONS EXPRESSED ARE THOSE OF OUR CORRESPONDENTS, WITH WHICH "THE AUTOCAR" DOES NOT NECESSARILY AGREE. LETTERS INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO THE EDITOR, "THE AUTOCAR," DORSET HOUSE, STAMFORD STREET, LONDON, S.E. I. [Image of a convertible car in a rural setting] Big, fast cars, of which the twelve-cylinder Lagonda is an outstanding example, play an important part nowadays in saving all possible time for those who must travel on national service, often over very considerable distances. M.P.G. RATHER THAN M.P.H. The Claims of a Topic That is Usually in Direct Opposition to Performance [50031.]—I think that if a census were taken of the number of readers interested in the recent challenge (letter No. 49971) to the 75 m.p.g. Fiat and those of the Bentley brigade you would find that m.p.g. far outweighs the m.p.h. topic. It is, therefore, on their behalf that I ask you to invite readers to tell of their experiences. At the present moment the low horse-power car, while in any case giving very good results in this direction, has, by the addition of different gadgets, capsules, and the exercise of amateur engineering and experimental “fiddling,” been known, as in the case of the Fiat, to give a phenomenal consumption. You have mentioned in the past a lead being taken from the exhaust to the inlet, and your correspondent in question, after apparently adopting the suggestion, has been successful in reaping benefits. Why is not the subject discussed more widely, so that we all benefit the country by using less petrol, and ourselves by doing our usual mileage at less cost? By the way, if one uses “So-and-so’s” capsules with 15 per cent. improved consumption, “somebody else’s” gadget with another 15 per cent. improvement, plus so on and so on, how much would we require to spend to be able to run our cars on the scent of petrol and air? For years now I have turned first to the Correspondence columns of your admirable journal, but, frankly, I am getting a little tired of reading how wonderful individual hand-built cars are, and would welcome a little more space devoted to Mr. Average-Motorist and his car. ARTHUR J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} FISHER. [Readers’ experiences such as our correspondent suggests will always be welcomed.—ED.{J. L. Edwards}] INDEPENDENT SUSPENSION Probable Advantages When on all Four Wheels [50032.]—The last time I felt that I should write letters to you was about 1911, when the Bevel versus Worm controversy was on. I stood up for the bevel, having had a lot of manufacturing and garage experience of both. This in spite of the fact that F.{Mr Friese} W. Lanchester was a friend, and I very much admired him; he taught me a lot of useful things in a remarkably short time, including how to fly aeroplanes (I had already been in airships). The war seems to have started a few more debatable points. In Montague Tombs' recent article he says: “Independent suspension may score over exceptionally bad road surfaces.” This is just what seems to me to be the disappointing part of the independent front suspension, and the reason why I took the fitting off my car and replaced it by a solid axle. Of course, I am inclined to think that there might be advantages in having both axles independently sprung at all four wheels, but the war so far has stopped my finding this out. It doesn't matter much, as there is no chance to use a certain very bad road. But the reason for using it at all is that it has easy grades, and saves about five miles; and sometimes the chance of not getting adhesion on the alternative road materialises at a sharp bend (our car is very light), and then we have to back about a mile. The easy road in question has very irregular, deep ruts, have filled in some, as no one else seems to use the road, but it is still the worst I know, and I have been in some places, including the road which keeps crossing the Darjeeling Himalayan Railway up the mountains in the North-East of India. It would seem that Montague Tombs is right with regard to pot-holes, but I doubt if he would still hold the view if he had a good and continuous “dose” of really annoying, deep, irregular ruts, coupled with synthetic bomb craters. Liverpool, 12. H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} C. HEYWOOD. TWENTY YEARS AGO Outstanding Makes of Cars That Come to Mind When Casting a Thought to the Past [50033.]—I read with particular interest a letter from Capt. J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} Aston [50014]. What a difference there was between 1939 and the early 1920’s! In the 'twenties several high-grade English cars were competing for the position of pre-eminence held for so many years by the Rolls-Royce. The following names come to mind: 50 h.p. Sheffield-Simplex, 40 h.p. Lanchester, 40-50 h.p. Napier, 40 h.p. Leyland Eight and 38 h.p. British Ensign. If it required any further advertisement, the fact of the Rolls-Royce holding its own against such a powerful array is the best substantiation of its claim to be the “World’s Best Car.” Although we are still in the throes of a gigantic struggle, one of the notions largely exercising the minds of our intelligentsia at the moment is the building of a “Better Britain.” B 18 | ||