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).
Development issues and delays with the 20/25, Spectre, and Peregrine models, and a decision to scrap the J-III.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 148\5\ scan0065 | |
| Date | 22th February 1935 | |
| -4- The present worst feature of the 20/25 is agreed to be performance. Had it not been for the policy to scrap J-III, this model would have replaced the 20/25 six months ago and certainly would have given us a more silent car with a much better performance. We say that the decision to scrap this car was a very bad one, even though we probably were not actively opposed to it at the time. We are now doing the work a second time by fitting a new head and axle to the 20/25. What concerns us is that there does not seem to be any reason why the same thing should not happen again, because we do not know who was responsible for the previous decision. You say that the SpectreCodename for Phantom III has been completed for six or seven months and even yet it is not running well enough to send to France. This is a simple statement of fact. In the SpectreCodename for Phantom III we have a car that is new from stem to stern, and certain features are new not only to us but are departures from conventional automobile practice. Briefly, we have a new engine with a novel cylinder construction, a new cooling system, a novel front suspension, a new type of steering that has not previously been made in England, a new frame, new brakes, electrical equipment, clutch, gearbox, rear axle, exhaust and intake systems. If we compare this specification with that of the Peregrine, which was so conventional that it was scaled down in By's Department, we see at once that as a moderate estimate we have about 5 times as much development work to do on the SpectreCodename for Phantom III, in addition to which, the problems on a big car are notoriously more difficult than those on a small one. The Peregrine went to France four months after the first car got on the road but only with an entirely experimental induction system and 19 major faults, enumarated in Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}1/MJ.22.8.32. It did not go to France with its own induction system until 7 months after the first car got on the road. We therefore say that from previous experience and consideration of the design, we were positive that the SpectreCodename for Phantom III would not be ready to go to France and do useful work for 9 months or so after the first car was put on the road, and certain that it could not be shown at Olympia 1935 with any chance of selling cars to customers before the middle of 1936, even taking an optimistic outlook and assuming that a concentration of effort would be made. Now, actually, the factory is congested with work and appears likely to be so for twelve months, so | ||