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).
Technical report discussing potential improvements in engines, brakes, streamlining, and shock absorbers.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 170\2\ img162 | |
| Date | 17th June 1933 guessed | |
| -4- Weight Saving Engines. We do not approach your figures of 1/2 HP. per cubic inch even with 80 Octane fuel. Oil cooling for summer conditions of 110°F.{Mr Friese} seems to hold us back. Hydraulic brakes. With steel drums having C.I. liners. Smaller brakes with more lining more uniformly applied. A steady whittling away of the frame after acceptance of rigid body mount. Then an attack on coachwork weights, seat cushions, weight of doors. Elimination of sheet metal petticoats stuck on as afterthoughts and substitution of an enveloping shell. These seem to be hopeful for weight saving. I think the custom body will survive but will have to contain more welded metal like aeroplane joints and built more scientifically to reinforce the vehicle instead of being carried around as dead load. Rear engines would be a great help in getting rid of the vast hole in the front of the frame made by a16 cyl. engine with unit transmission. Some way to bridge this gap effectively seems essential. You have at least the dashboard, but we lack even that. Streamlining. The big cars appear to have the advantage of better ratio of length to frontal area. The tail seems the biggest single stop, then the front fenders. A frame line lower to the ground is a big help in getting head room without wind resistance. Since we must have a certain standard of acceleration from stop lights and the contest in this respect gets more bitter year after year, streamlining will not allow us to use smaller engines. The crowd of cars waiting at a stop light is a major problem today. Some are old and decrepit. There are trucks. There is a leavening of high performance cars. Cities like Detroit permit 35 and wink at 45 on main boulevards. The first up to speed keeps ahead of the field and saves himself delay, annoyance, and damaged fenders. The power-weight ratio governs this rather than streamlining provided that reasonably efficient means exist for getting the power to the rear wheels. This limits our interest in streamlining and increases our interest in power weight ratio. A supercharger even if it only operated during these short periods, would be worth the money. Inertia Shock Absorbers. My own opinion is that whatever of eliminating ride control (manual) they show no prospect what function as "grab-handles" particularly at the rear, to prevent disturbance of the passengers on the awful long waves of which | ||