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).
Inquiry into the cleaning methods and durability of Cellulose enamel finish compared to traditional varnish.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 117\1\ scan0001 | |
| Date | 6th February 1926 | |
| DA{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}/W. Cunanche Test Lettering. Copy to Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} ✓ 44659 c/Hn{F. C. Honeyman - Retail orders}9/MH.{M. Huckerby}6.2.26. Cellulose Finish. You will recollect that Hooper's arranged for the Enclosed Limousine Body for the Experimental Department to be finished with Cellulose enamel. Can you give me for the C.S.C please, any information as to how the Cellulose finish has stood up and how it compares with the ordinary varnish finish, from the point of view of cleaning. It was recently reported to the C.S.C. that if a Cellulose treated car is washed with running water in the same way as a varnish treated car is washed, the enamel must be laboriously polished by hand and that the whole process of washing and polishing takes considerably longer than the washing of a varnish treated car. On the other hand the C.S.C. are told that it is not necessary to apply running water to clean a Cellulose finished car, but that it only needs to be wiped off with a damp cloth even when it is very dirty. The C.S.C. would like to know whether wiping with a damp cloth effectually cleans really dirty Cellulose enamel and if not, and running water has to be applied, whether it is correct that it is necessary for the enamel to be repolished by hand. Can you provide any information on these points please, from your experience with the Hooper body referred to above. Obviously, if a Cellulose treated body has to be washed like a varnish finished car, and in addition has to be carefully polished, the chief advantage claimed for Cellulose enamel ceases to exist. c/Hn{F. C. Honeyman - Retail orders}/ | ||