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).
Comparative review of proposed cheaper Lucas headlamps against existing models for an L.H. chassis.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 61a\2\ scan0111 | |
| Date | 8th February 1931 | |
| Roy.{Sir Henry Royce} from EFC. X6116 EFC7/ADL8.2.31. X.6116. LUCAS LAMPS OF CHEAPER DESIGN PROPOSED FOR L.H. CHASSIS. We have carefully examined the set of Lucas lamps which you have had made up and the following are our comments :- Headlamps. (1) Each headlamp weighs 9 lbs. as compared with 10 lbs, for the Lucas P.100 lamps. The C.M.Hall lamp weighs only 7 lbs. (2) The glass is not sealed to the reflector but there is a cork ring which seals the reflector to the frame carrying the glass, the glass being sealed to the frame by the rubber ring. The weather-proofness of the cork joint may/slightly upset by the be fact that the cork bears on the reflector screw heads. (3) The lamp front is hinged to the top of the body - not hooked as in the Hall lamp which means, as in the case of the P.100, that the lamp front has to be held up by hand when changing the bulb. The hinge is also probably more expensive than the hook arrangement on the Hall lamp. (4) The screw catch to fasten the front is not so easy as the spring arrangement on the Hall lamp. (5) The "biflex" feature of the lamp appears to be ineffective. It is not comparable with the Zeiss arrangement which undoubtedly is much better. (6) The lamp is fitted with the ordinary Lucas "diffusa" front glass whereas we are under the impression that the vertical rib glass for sideway dispersion is legally necessary in the States. | ||