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).
Correspondence page from a motoring publication featuring letters to the editor on various topics.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 160\5\ scan0283 | |
| Date | 12th March 1941 | |
| The Motor 122 March 12, 1941. Correspondence Contd. An Intriguing Insurance Suggestion I WOULD like to refer to the original suggestion regarding sports car insurance from " F.L.M.H. " and the reply by " Velox " (The Motor, February 26) but I do not want to enter into any controversy regarding the controllability of what " Velox " terms the vintage sports cars, as compared with the more modern type. There is, however, one aspect of insurance that, so far, I have never yet seen ventilated, and to my mind it appears so logical that it is surprising that no enterprising company has yet offered its advantages to the overburdened motorist. My suggestion is that motor insurance should be divided into two entirely different classes. One class should deal entirely with the insurance of the vehicle only against damage, loss by fire, theft, etc., up to the value of the vehicle, and this insurance should be optional, but it should, of course, apply only to the particular car insured. The other insurance would be applied to whoever wishes to drive a car, and should, of course, be compulsory. This insurance should deal solely with Third Party risks and the premium should be based on the age, status, occupation and record of the driver, with a usefully graded form of " no-claim " bonus. In other words, Third Party claims should be attached to the driver and accidental damage to the vehicle. It would at least do away with the absurd anomaly that at present exists in rates of premiums on various types and makes of car, irrespective of who drives them. CECIL KIMBER, Managing Director. The M.G. CAR Co., LTD. Abingdon. Sports Enthusiast Tries a “Ten” WHILE on leave I have had the pleasure of driving a car again, after a period of nearly 12 months away from the wheel. Although an ardent believer in “ sports car motoring, ” I must confess to being pleasantly surprised by the capabilities of the 10 h.p. family saloon which I hired. It is a type of car for which I had very little use before Hitler made the Continent unfit for motorist's consumption, but it certainly had much to commend it—a smooth and easy revving engine, an almost too easy gear change and powerful brakes. My main criticism concerned an accessory. Never before have I achieved so effortless a 75 m.p.h., nor have I cruised through speed limits at so great a speed without interference from the police. Can it be that any owner is really deluded by these fantastic speedometers? Yet it must be so, for do we not all know how much faster family saloons are reputed to be than our pukka sports jobs! Another impression: where is all this bad driving one reads about? Apart from Army drivers, it seemed to me that the standard of conduct on the roads to-day is 100 per cent. better than it was 18 months ago. R.{Sir Henry Royce} DE YARBURGH BATESON. London, S.W.1. Middle-of-the-Road Merchants YOUR correspondent " Centenarian " (The Motor, February 26) has undoubtedly touched on one of the worst possible features of English motoring when he mentions the practice of driving in the middle of the road. As a driver for over 30 years and with a similar period in examining road accidents—with experience of American and Continental roads—I say quite definitely that the habit of driving in the middle of the road, more particularly by small car users, contributes very considerably to the number of accidents. This driving and the crossing by pedestrians anywhere except at a pedestrian crossing are the prime causes of most accidents. The narrowness of our roads and the disgraceful apathy of the authorities for the past 20 years in their failure to produce anything like reasonably safe and wide roads, although the motorist has contributed millions and millions of pounds, are other accident causes. W. R.{Sir Henry Royce} PONTING. London, W.1. Safety at Speed EVIDENTLY " Centenarian ” agrees completely with the point I was making in my letter (The Motor, February 19). He firmly believes that safety at speed is a matter of practice. It is precisely because many motorists will never get sufficient practice that I say a 120 m.p.h. highway cannot be safe if all and sundry drivers are permitted to use it. My point is made still clearer by " Centenarian's " reference to Walter Lindrum's once-astounding break of 1,000 and his subsequent ability to repeat this performance as and when he wished. Despite a multiplicity of billiards tables up and down the country, the ordinary player still finds this feat quite beyond his own ability. As to the final paragraph of that letter (in which the writer says that if we ate, moved, and did everything else twice as fast, we need only live half as long), any reader can form his own opinion. It left me wondering why the writer chose to sign himself as " Centenarian. " E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} P. WILLOUGHBY. Coventry. Refused a Free Lift! DRIVING out of town, I saw a neighbour from my village—an elderly gentleman—waiting for a bus. I stopped and offered him a lift, but he refused. It so happened that I saw him the same evening and jokingly teased him about having refused a lift with me. He replied: " Well, you see, I had travelled in by bus and I had to use up my return ticket. " R.T. Bedford. The Little Man's Seat APPARENTLY your correspondent " Little Fella, " who asks for more variation in seat adjustments (The Motor, March 5), is unacquainted with pre-war developments. At the 1938 Motor Show, both on certain specialised cars and in the galleries, there were demonstrations of a seat, adjustable for height, leg-length and rake. R.McM. Huddersfield. (Cartoon Text) THOUGHTS ON YOUR SPRING OVERHAUL A40 | ||