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).
Clarifying misunderstandings about the 'W' series radiator and bonnet design.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 66a\4\ scan0099 | |
| Date | 15th July 1925 | |
| +8240 To BY.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} from DA.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} c. to Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} 'W' SERIES RADIATOR BONNET AND DASH. X. 8250 X. 8240 X. 8500 Replying to your BY2/H13.7.25., and referring to the 'W' series radiator, we may have conveyed to Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} an impression which we did not intend to convey. What we were doing was explaining to Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} how we came to believe that 'W' series radiator was exactly like 'V' except for the height. We believed this because (1) We thought your BY/C3/H16.5.25. said so. (2) We knew we had never sent you a design of a tapered radiator sitting on the 'V' series cross member. (3) We did not remember seeing any report of tests or approval of appearance on the tapered radiator, and had always doubted whether Sales would approve. Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} pointed out that the word 'the' in front of "1" higher" may give a different meaning to the note, and as regards (2) a design from us was no doubt scarcely necessary. The point seems to be however that instead of criticising your dept. as you imply, we were really endeavouring to explain our mistaken reading of BY/C3/H16.5.25. I may say we had gathered the impression in various ways that 'W' series had become exactly like 'V' series except for a higher radiator, and a higher and wider bonnet and dash. BY5/H21.11.24. seems to be speaking of a complete EAC.2. radiator, bonnet, dash and cross member, which we believed had been washed out, and which BY/C3/H16.5.25. seemed to us (mistakenly) to confirm. Even had we been fully aware of what was happening it is difficult to see what we could have done, since the intention to fit the tapered radiator was a decision of the "high command" which we could not interfere with. Now with reference to the whole of the rest of your letter, viz. criticism directed against the bonnet, radiator, shutter control, etc. on (as I understand) Mr. Royce's chassis which came down here, I did not see this chassis, and know nothing whatever about the remarks and criticisms you refer to. I do not remember mentioning the radiator and bonnet (except as stated above) to Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} while here, nor did I hear anyone else do so. My letter BA2/M6.7.25. dictated as a result of information supplied to me, cannot possibly be construed as a criticism of your dept., but seems to take any blame on ourselves. As to the shutter control, I said to Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} that the one on the car he then had (not N.sch.1967) was in my opinion better than either of its successors, and thought this again cannot possibly reflect on your dept. it was absolutely the only remark on the shutter control I made to Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} or anyone else. In short as regards this part of your letter, if any recrimination is necessary it should be directed against someone else - (I do not know whom.) DA.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} | ||