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).
Test driver's report on vehicle handling with suggestions for design improvements.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 3\4\ 04-page329 | |
| Date | 1st June 1933 | |
| - 2 - Cx{Major Len W. Cox - Advertising Manager}11/KHB.6.33. Steering. The steering was very nice at slow or moderate speeds but at over 80 I should have liked it to be a little more selective. There seemed to be a great deal of lost movement of the steering wheel at that speed. I found it a little difficult to place the car just where I wanted, at, say, 80 m.p.h. unless the road was more or less perfect. I wondered this morning when driving this car whether it would stand the higher geared axle which I understand is available for the open body. As on this car one is expected to use the gearbox more possibly the higher axle would give the car a greater maximum speed, but I don't suppose it would make all the difference that I feel is necessary. Springing. I thought the springing on the whole very good and one could not reasonably find fault with it. SUGGESTIONS (1) That different type milled nuts, i.e. Bentley type be fitted to the valve cover and tappet covers. (2) That the petrol tank filler cap have the letter 'B' on it. (3) That the change-speed and brake lever grips be of a different type. (4) That the rubber covers to the pedals have 'B' moulded in the rubber. These suggestions are to get away from R-R detail features which may give rise to the car being considered very largely a Rolls-Royce chassis. (5) I am in favour of the Rudge Whitworth type hubs in order to maintain a difference between this and a Rolls-Royce. (6) I think the bumper fittings on the front dumb irons should be covered by the dumb iron shields, which are at present a bit too short. (7) The facia board looks very heavy and I believe that the centre panel could be brought towards the driver several inches with improvement in its general appearance. It would also improve the visibility of the instruments fitted in the top of the panel which are at present half cut off by the top rail of the instrument board. The visibility of the revolution counter was also impaired for the same reason; the rail was too low. (contd) | ||