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).
Complaints regarding bad springing and uncomfortable rear seating on the 40/50 Phantom chassis.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 67a\1\ scan0243 | |
| Date | 31th August 1932 | |
| Sgd " Derby. copy " " London. " " "Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}" Derby X8410 Ps4/JP.31/8/2 RE SPRINGING OF 40/50 CHASSIS. AND REAR SEATING. I do think we are getting far too many complaints of bad springing on Phantom chassis, and usually I find the rear springs to be 200 lbs too strong. At least I manage to give greater satisfaction under all conditions by fitting 200 lbs. lighter springs, but a lot is laid at the door of chassis springing which does not concern it. I consider that the rear seating is abominable in many cars I have tested, and although much time and money has been spent in producing a wonderful cushion with super cushions of extremely soft material, little or no thought is given to the rear squab, where in my opinion lies the major portion of the trouble of poor springing. One usually finds the squabs of the rear seats too stiff, and this causes what the French call: "Coups de raquette" which describes what I want to explain, viz: that one is thrown forward as well as upwards by road shocks. Again, I find the place where one requires soft padding viz: that part of the squab which usually supports the shoulder blades, there is scarcely any padding, and on one car this week, fitted with expensive coachwork, my shoulders came in contact with the wooden frame work of the squab. I believe the unpleasantness complained of is not so much the up and down movement, but the pitching forward one is subjected on poorly made rear squabs. I have demonstrated this to my own satisfaction this week by rigging up temporary cushions on the rear of a car. Another point to watch carefully is the front springing. If one strengthens up the front springs, and increases the friction of the front shock-absorbers, the comfort in the rear of the car is considerably increased; decreasing the pitching of the nose of the car diminishes the "coups de raquette" sensation, which I will now describe as similar to that experienced when riding in dog cart due to the spring in the shafts. Ps. | ||