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).
Performance comparison report between a Phantom and a Stutz vehicle, covering hills, consumption, resistance, and suspension.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 23\5\ Scan059 | |
| Date | 27th February 1928 guessed | |
| contd :- -7- The results indicate that the Phantom is superior to the Stutz at low speed full throttle work viz: Stanton and Pistern hills, but the Stutz is very slightly superior at the higher speeds viz: 1st. and 2nd., and 3rd. Ticknall, this is what we should expect after seeing the acceleration curves. The petrol consumption averages 30 m.p.h. on a give-and-take road = 12 m.p.g. Tractive resistance. To compare the tractive resistance of the Stutz with a standard Phantom, the two cars were put in top gear side by side and stationary on a hill and allowed to roll until they stopped. The maximum speed attained by the Stutz was 15 m.p.h. and 20 m.p.h. by the Phantom, the Stutz rolled 340 ft. less than the Phantom, the distance travelled by the Stutz being approx. 1357 ft. A second test was carried out, both cars being throttled off at 35 m.p.h. and allowed to roll in top gear until they stopped. 8-EX rolled 1894 ft. and the Stutz 1374 ft. The weights of the cars as tested were :- Stutz - 45 cwts. 2 qrs. 14 lbs. 8-EX - 52 " 2 " The results are what could be expected when the comparative weights and gear ratios are considered. Suspension: The riding qualities were compared with a std. 20 HP. The comparison was not very favourable to the Stutz. The springing is softer than our 20 HP. but is marred at all speeds by very bad pitching. At high speeds this is especially violent, the shock damping is very inadequate. There is only one condition under which the suspension can claim contd :- | ||