The Versailles Splashguard Trials : Results.
Page 12
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The need for some efficient form of splashguard device appears to be much more keenly appreciated by our neighbours across the Channel than by our selves. This is true at any rate in respect of the official mind. Given sufficiently muddy conditions, the ordinary pedestrian is fully alive to the unpleasantness of mud-splashing from passing vehicles, whether they be horse-drawn or motor-driven. The British wayfarer is, in that respect, we imagine, but little different from his French confrere.
However this may be, the powers that be in Paris are once moils ahead in the matter of investigation. The first of two sets of trials took place on Saturday and Sunday last ; the second, which will undoubtedly be the more important, and the results of which will have a more certain bearing on the adoption of one or more types by licensing and other authorities, will take place under the regis of the Compagnie Gengrale des Omnibus de Paris at some date in the near future, which has not, as we write, been fixed. A very large number of designs has been submitted to the advisory committee which is investigating their claims on behalf of the municipality and the Paris omnibus company, and, as we have already recorded, by far the larger proportion of these is impracticable. An occasional correspondent kindly undertook to observe the first and smaller trials, which were held by the Automobile Club of the Seine-et-Oise in Versailles last Saturday and Sunday, and we are therefore in a position to record his impressions of the results which were achieved on that occasion.
Roughly, he reports to us, the devices may be classified under two headings—those which consisted of continuous rubber bands clamped to the felloes of the wheels, and those which were pendant from the hubs, carrying, at the lower ends of the suspension frame, a brush or valiance. Frankly, he was not impressed by the results of the trials. In his opinion, no single example which was submitted for trial satis factorily prevented the entire splashing of mud, and in only a few instances, moreover, were the devices capable of withstanding the certainly severe test which was imposed upon them in regard to collision with kerbs.
On the Saturday, an endurance run from Versailles to Charties and back,. a distance of about 60 miles, was made at high speed, whilst the following day was devoted to tests over a prepared surface at yersailles, the splashes being recorded on screens specially ruled off for the purpose of scoring. The same device has been satisfactorily used before, and illustrated by us. Twenty machines started from Versailles for the run to Chartres. Nine of these were fitted with some form of indiarubber flange attached to the felloes ; the rest were of the brush or valiance pattern. The mudguards were fitted to all the wheels in each case. On the whole, as we have recorded, the splashguarding capabilities of the fittings were disappoint ing. Several of the devices were ot practically no use at all, and only a few were more or less effective. There was not one, according to our correspondent, which could be considered to be a real guard in the proper sense of the term. After the mud-splashing tests, the cars were driven at an angle of about 30 degrees full tilt at a 6-in. deep kerb. Both near-side wheels had to mount the kerb from about 8 yds., drop off the kerb, and then continue to run for about another 20 yds., with the side of the wheel in. close contact with the kerb. In many cases this test proved too much for the splashguards. No. 18, the Garchey, was one of those which came to grief on this test ; it was, however, unani mously awarded the first prize. No 3, the Gruyelle, although of not much effect as a splashguard, with stood the kerb collision test quite well. This guard is of such construction that the metal brush-holder is held in close proximity to the felloe in such a way that no part of it other than the brush attachment protrudes beyond the tire. This, however, appeared to be too close to the wheel itself satisfactorily to catch the mud. No. 5, the Dreux, has the appearance of an ordinary broomhead slung on a wire frame from the hub. One of these brushes is fitted on each side of each wheel. This also went through the kerb test very well. The two best fitted of the pendant type were undoubtedly No. 6, the Morand, and No. 3, the Gruyelle, details of which appear to have been given much thought by the inventors. Our correspondent was most impressed, however, with the Pareboue Menu, which consists of rings cut from the walls of Michelin or other well-known pneumatic tires, and bolted round the wheel periphery at the sides of the tires. This is undoubtedly a good idea, and, moreover, what is the most impbrtant 'point, it is not unsightly as are so many of the pendant type. It is not attached in any way to the hub, and that is an advantage. Our correspondent informs us that the Menu type of guard stood the kerb test—which was obviously of a most severe kind—quite satisfactorily. The only criticism he had to offer with regard to it was that it tended, when the car was loaded, to sit down in the mud and collect it unnecessarily, and subsequently to fling it off centrifugally, such dispersal having to be caught by the mudguards proper. The order of merit is as follows ; —1, Garchey ; 2, Menu ; 3, Dreux ; 4, Malraux ; 5, Menu ; 6, Couvreur ; 7, Gruyelle ; 8, Jangy ; 9, Hamet ; 10, Bouillet; 1, Clerget ; 12, Heyvaert ; 13, Frainier ; 14, Bristol ; 15, Demontais.