Jump to content

American Rolls Royce (Ghost, PI & PII)


alsancle

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, alsancle said:

My understanding is that this car was Brad Hunter’s. I think his handle on the forum was silverghost?

 

I’m a sucker for these two door Victoria style bodies. The greenhouse is very high but I find it attractive.

It's an iron-head PI...which is a plus and I like that style too but the price is unrealistic given how much would be needed to get it servicable...and I'm saying that from the perspective of someone who could do most of it myself.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, K8096 said:

This was in Cleveland in the late 70s.  Not sure where it is now.  I believe it was sold out of the area by the early 80’s.   These are photos of photos so sorry for being a little blurry. 
 


 

 

1384FD33-0A18-4AFF-9F38-B1E566B4CF75.jpeg

 

 

 

    This looks like it could be a pre-restoration photo of John's from CIncy. Perhaps he can chime in. I remember him mentioning to the group the rare, later, almost PII style body with lowered roof line and raked windshield on a P1. Can't be too many like that. Compare with his photo one page back.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JV Puleo said:

It's an iron-head PI...which is a plus and I like that style too but the price is unrealistic given how much would be needed to get it servicable...and I'm saying that from the perspective of someone who could do most of it myself.

 

Joe,  I was told that when the aluminum heads were reproduced they were done in cast iron.   Is that true?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that I know of. I saw Frank Cooke's prototype head running on one of his cars and it was aluminum.

I've never seen any of the more recent versions but there wouldn't be any good reason to make them out of iron. We can assume that the new heads are/were cast from a much better alloy. I doubt you could even get the original material and if you could, why? It was not an easy casting to replicate. There were problems with the thickness of the water passages and the early ones overheated. I'm wondering if the new technology for 3D printing a sand mould might be applied. It's used in rapid prototyping and you may have to cut up a bad head to get the dimensions of the passages if no drawings exist...it's all beyond my means now in any case.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JV Puleo said:

Not that I know of. I saw Frank Cooke's prototype head running on one of his cars and it was aluminum.

I've never seen any of the more recent versions but there wouldn't be any good reason to make them out of iron. We can assume that the new heads are/were cast from a much better alloy. I doubt you could even get the original material and if you could, why? It was not an easy casting to replicate. There were problems with the thickness of the water passages and the early ones overheated. I'm wondering if the new technology for 3D printing a sand mould might be applied. It's used in rapid prototyping and you may have to cut up a bad head to get the dimensions of the passages if no drawings exist...it's all beyond my means now in any case.

 

 

I have had a few of the rough castings in my hands..........they were aluminum. And heavy.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The machining would be the real job...

I saw Frank Cooke's shop at the time he was making the heads. Most of the machines, although beautifully maintained, were at least as old as mine. I've thought about how I'd go about doing that but I'm not sure I'd want the tension that would be a major part of the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, JV Puleo said:

Not that I know of. I saw Frank Cooke's prototype head running on one of his cars and it was aluminum.

I've never seen any of the more recent versions but there wouldn't be any good reason to make them out of iron. We can assume that the new heads are/were cast from a much better alloy. I doubt you could even get the original material and if you could, why? It was not an easy casting to replicate. There were problems with the thickness of the water passages and the early ones overheated. I'm wondering if the new technology for 3D printing a sand mould might be applied. It's used in rapid prototyping and you may have to cut up a bad head to get the dimensions of the passages if no drawings exist...it's all beyond my means now in any case.

 

Joe funny you should mention this.

 

This week I have been working at two extremes of technology - placed an order with Hudson Belting (in business since 1854) for new leather belting for the Grady Machine Shop and on the other end working on a project which will use 3D printed sand molds. I am currently waiting for a new quote so we can pull the trigger and get the castings poured. Its a really neat technology.  Its not cheap but compared to the cost of having traditional patterns and core boxes fabricated its a huge savings. However, unlike traditional patterns, its a one shot deal best suited for one-off parts. If your doing a run, than your better off going the traditional route where you can reuse the patterns and core boxes again and again and amortize the cost. Another drawback is if you have to contract out the CAD work for the 3D models its going to get $$$$$ fast! 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Terry Harper said:

 

Joe funny you should mention this.

 

This week I have been working at two extremes of technology - placed an order with Hudson Belting (in business since 1854) for new leather belting for the Grady Machine Shop and on the other end working on a project which will use 3D printed sand molds. I am currently waiting for a new quote so we can pull the trigger and get the castings poured. Its a really neat technology.  Its not cheap but compared to the cost of having traditional patterns and core boxes fabricated its a huge savings. However, unlike traditional patterns, its a one shot deal best suited for one-off parts. If your doing a run, than your better off going the traditional route where you can reuse the patterns and core boxes again and again and amortize the cost. Another drawback is if you have to contract out the CAD work for the 3D models its going to get $$$$$ fast! 

 

My neighbors in the aluminum foundry use 3D printed molds occasionally. They have a customer that supplies them...and I suspect for some sort of regular production. At least they have never said they were one-off experimental castings. I'm guessing that it may be a practical thing to do if it's a very short run and the part is simple — which certainly isn't the case with a RR head. What I find encouraging is that the technology seems to be advancing very quickly. It may only be a matter of a few years before we see it getting quite affordable...at least in comparison to making really complex traditional patterns. I generally prefer the old way but there are things I just don't think will ever get done unless we find a new way of approaching them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a car collector from the Chicago area. He owned one of these Henley Roadsters. He stored all the cars in a large basement garage under his home. The cars were so tightly packed in you really couldn’t appreciate any one car. Ed Trager was his name and he owned great cars. Every time I visited him I always got a kick out of seeing on the hood of that R.R. he had one of these radio model cars8D185B6E-E39D-443C-BA2E-F043EBDA93C5.jpeg.e1509c840c894377049a85a2a1d3e6f9.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing to do is to 3d model the patterns then sand cast to heads in small batches, any decent pattern maker could translate the head drawings into 3d technology and he would also understand the different compensations needed for Iron as opposed to aluminium because they will be very different due to different cooling rates (giving cavities if wrong) and shrinkages (giving cracking)

8818E900-C081-4CB4-968D-2114F7C001D5.jpeg

Edited by Keith Ward (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, George K said:

Never been a RR guy. I don’t think I’d walk across the street to look at one. When was out in the ether googling around this showed up. I would definitely walk across to inspect this one. Cuts a nice line.

 

George,  I wasn't for years and then started to pay attention when somebody offered me a PI in trade for one of my cars.    The Brewster bodies are built to as high a quality as anything during the coachbuilt era,  and the chassis are ridiculous in their engineering.    A well sorted Rolls is as good as any prewar car.   The key being "well sorted".  However,  you can still get most parts and there are a number of very qualified shops in the US that can work on them.

 

This was the first car that made me pay attention 20 years ago when I saw it at auction.   Fantastic lines, history, etc.

 

1934 Rolls-Royce Phantom II Henley Coupe By Brewster (Chassis: 221AMS)|  Gooding & Company | Rolls royce phantom, Rolls royce, Rolls royce cars

Edited by alsancle (see edit history)
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, alsancle said:

 

George,  I wasn't for years and then started to pay attention when somebody offered me a PI in trade for one of my cars.    The Brewster bodies are built to as high a quality as anything during the coachbuilt era,  and the chassis are ridiculous in their engineering.    A well sorted Rolls is as good as any prewar car.   The key being "well sorted".  However,  you can still get most parts and there are a number of very qualified shops in the US that can work on them.

 

This was the first car that made me pay attention 20 years ago when I saw it at auction.   Fantastic lines, history, etc.

 

1934 Rolls-Royce Phantom II Henley Coupe By Brewster (Chassis: 221AMS)|  Gooding & Company | Rolls royce phantom, Rolls royce, Rolls royce cars

I have to say I like the slightly vee windshield better. Suggests a hint of sporting. These Brewster bodies are very Germanic. What years are they?8C670F94-E40B-4DB2-A124-0D3F85CE6F36.jpeg.5909fce21de95355df743c448f3caf65.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, George K said:

I have to say I like the slightly vee windshield better. Suggests a hint of sporting. These Brewster bodies are very Germanic. What years are they?

 

The Brewster Henley bodies predate the 320 Special Roadster you pictured which is circa 1936/37.   I would say they were all built between 31-33,  but some maybe not sold till later.   The AJS series LHD chassis were all built in the spring of 1931 in England.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, alsancle said:

 

The Brewster Henley bodies predate the 320 Special Roadster you pictured which is circa 1936/37.   I would say they were all built between 31-33,  but some maybe not sold till later.   The AJS series LHD chassis were all built in the spring of 1931 in England.

The swept windshield and curved side widow is amazingly similar. I once owned a hardtop removable 320. Who did the design work at Brewster? What’s the Henley refer to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, George K said:

Never been a RR guy. I don’t think I’d walk across the street to look at one. When was out in the ether googling around this showed up. I would definitely walk across to inspect this one.E8F8A2BE-FCBC-4F6E-B16B-752005BC86E0.jpeg.5fe5e366a27f61038f42032cb1a7a79b.jpeg02127D61-A018-4905-94F1-86B81A6B8EE0.jpeg.6411ee3fdac0b6e93ce227a842d7c1e2.jpeg Cuts a nice line.


 

George, come on down for a visit. I’ll take you for a ride in it. 😎

 

Here is a view from the other side of the windshield last month…………😏

 

A better view in my opinion! 
 

75ACDFEC-A4ED-4FCE-B328-BFECA1657B69.png
 

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, edinmass said:


 

George, come on down for a visit. I’ll take you for a ride in it. 😎

 

Here is a view from the other side of the windshield last month…………😏

 

A better view in my opinion! 
 

75ACDFEC-A4ED-4FCE-B328-BFECA1657B69.png
 

Most likely my big ass won’t fit . Thanks anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, George K said:

The swept windshield and curved side widow is amazingly similar. I once owned a hardtop removable 320. Who did the design work at Brewster? What’s the Henley refer to?

 

Not to go too far off topic.  But was it this car?

320Coupe.JPG

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's tough to say but I'm guessing it's an English RR. The American PI's almost all had running board tool/battery boxes. It's too out-of-focus to be certain but those look like English hubs. [EDIT] I think it has to be a PII. I don't see the cantilevered rear springs that always show on Ghosts and PI's. In the first picture it appears to be RHD so, it's an English PII.

Edited by JV Puleo (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alsancle said:

Here is the coupe from the last page that was owned by Brad Hunter previously.  Pictured in RR in America by Decampi.   Not as flattering in this picture.

IMG_9946.jpg

I still like it a lot.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a snowball's chance in hell of ever having another PI, much less a Ghost but IF that were to happen it would have to be one that was in need of a lot of work and a seller that appreciates how much it would cost to fix. About the only thing that really intimidates me would be a bad aluminum head. The popular notion that anyone who'd be interested has money to burn is against me there...though I haven't seen any evidence that those buyers are common. If anything, the folks who know also know the costs involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, K8096 said:

I found a side view of it.  What model is it?   PI that was updated?
 

 

DAA9199F-C3ED-4BB5-8641-9B89FC0B059A.jpeg

Do we have a view that confirms LHD?

 

The hubs do look to be dunlops, but those look like snap rings which are not phantom II.

 

EDIT:  The body over the chassis is definitely a PII feature for the most part.

Edited by alsancle (see edit history)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, alsancle said:

Do we have a view that confirms LHD?

 

The hubs do look to be dunlops, but those look like snap rings which are not phantom II.

 

EDIT:  The body over the chassis is definitely a PII feature for the most part.

I think the first picture shows its RHD. I can't say it was never done but covering the rear springs on a PI would be a real coach building challenge. Also I seem to remember that the original spring gaiters on a PI had fittings for a screw-in oil gun and I'm not sure you could reach them if the springs were covered. (Though I admit I may be confusing that with another car — the gaiters seem to almost always be missing but I have seen original ones in place.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/18/2022 at 6:22 PM, George K said:

The swept windshield and curved side widow is amazingly similar. I once owned a hardtop removable 320. Who did the design work at Brewster? What’s the Henley refer to?

John Inskip is usually credited with the Brewster design work in the 1930's.  If others contributed, I'd appreciate hearing about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JS Inskip was the Sales Manager at Brewster...as such he probably did have some input regarding design but I think it unlikely he was the actual "designer" of any of the American RR cars though he probably had more to say about the post-RR "Brewsters" on a Ford chassis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the PII designs were actually done long before the end of production. They were using up the left over inventory before installing the more modern stuff……….there are examples of PII coachwork built in batches and the entire bunch of bodies sat for 24 months until the similar earlier styles were used up. The cars were built so the new dashboard panels that weren’t designed yet could be installed later…….thus many of the cars have  double thickness dash panels ………in essence they were “cut away” and used as mounting surfaces for what would come later. So Brewster was aware that the bodies would be hanging around for a while.

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...