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).
Review of different battery types, comparing costs, cold starting performance, and longevity, with a recommendation for standardization.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 58\4\ Scan258 | |
| Date | 22th April 1936 | |
| -2- Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Wst.1/JH: 22.4.36. battery voltages and a change of voltage regulator is now under review. We feel that a customer will not mind replacing his battery every two or three years in return for much better starting from cold. Incidentally the replacement cost is much less with these thin plate batteries than our existing batteries i.e. standard Phantom battery Exide type 6 x H.R.11 - IM1 costs £7.15.0. whereas new Exide battery type 6 x CMR.13 - IM1 only costs £5.8.0. (retail). We have to make an immediate decision however between the following alternatives :- (1) Whether to carry on with the existing battery which will last long but prejudices successful starting from cold. (2) Take the risk and standardize the new thin plate battery which immediately improves the cold starting but has a short life. We recommend that we decide on (2) as far as the Exide battery is concerned because it is a standard proved battery, but in the case of the Peto & Radford battery which has a new taller plate we prefer to defer standardization until further chassis and bench tests have been completed. The difference between the two makes of batteries submitted are as follows :- (a) Exide 6XCMR13 - Phantom III. 6XCMR11 - 25/30 and Bentley. These batteries have the standard XC Exide plate which is slightly thicker than the Dagenite but which has a slightly thinner "flesh" on the wood seperators. Ebonite seperators the same. | ||