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).
Owner experiences and issues with batteries and dynamos on 40/50 HP & 20 HP chassis.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 47\4\ Scan051 | |
| Date | 4th December 1925 | |
| S/W. from MK.{R. E. B. Meade-King} c. to H.{Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} MK1/IN/4.12.25. RE BATTERIES & DYNAMOS. 40/50 HP. & 20 HP.CHASSIS. With reference to your Hm{Capt. W. Hallam - Head Repairs}/NRC{N. R. Chandler}9/EW25.11.25. I do not find that in the area I visit where is a great deal of trouble experienced in keeping batteries well charged, and think this is probably due to the fact that practically all the owners do a good proportion of long runs as well as any town work. In the winter I find that a number of owners in a city like Glasgow do use a separate charging board in their garage, but mostly they volunteer that they only do it to be on the safe side. I may say that on the other hand, when visiting any cars in London I find artificial charging largely resorted to from necessity. An this of course bears out what you say as to conditions varying so much. I have noticed a distinct falling off in complaints of battery trouble in the last two years, but would not like to say whether this is due to improved workmanship or to the fact that owners have realised more the necessity for care and attention being given to them. As regards dynamos, those troubles I come across seem to be mostly due to control brush and its inaccessibility. When a man is examining the other brushes, he cannot give the same attention to the control brush without moving the dynamo, which the average driver usually seems to be chary of doing on his own and especially so now that it means moving the magneto as well, and this results in neglect of that brush and consequent falling off in dynamo efficiency. MK.{R. E. B. Meade-King} | ||