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).
Steering instability, comparing split vs solid springs and the effects of greasy springs and tyres.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 20\2\ Scan070 | |
| Date | 1st February 1920 | |
| Contd. -3- Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}4/L320.2.20. fitted to 2512. We found that changing over the springs did not materially effect the steering. The only difference we could pick out was that the split springs on the Repair Car did appear to be more flexibile and the car rolled more. It was certain, however, that the fact of putting the solid springs of the old type on 49-GB did [handwritten: not] overcome the particular trouble we were testing. We have also run a Production chassis with a big covered body. We find that the riding and steering of that car are quite good. The worst effect we could get on there is when the springs have just been greased. The results up-to-date show us that the things to avoid are very greasy springs and Goddyear rubber non-skid tyres on the back of the car. We have not yet made a test with Goodyear rubber non-skid tyres on the front of the car as well; we shall do this asosooon as we can obtain the necessary tyres. X.3463. One point we have got ot admit is that we do find a difference in the steering of cars which at present we cannot explain but which we are woking on. We have tried more friction in the steering - 2 springs in the side steering tube instead of 4 - we have tried with no springs in the side steering tube. We still get the noticeable difference between the cars. This unstableness of steering is the one complaint which we can appreciate on our cars. As regards the difference between split and solid springs, the only difference we can appreciate so far is when travelling very fast over a very bad road that the axle bounces about more than with the [handwritten: split springs (sgd) Lu] | ||