Part 1 (2/2)

=_Agents Want{d}_

SYLPH CYCLES RUN EASY

Pneumatics not enough; springs necessary for comfort & safety Sylph spring frame saves muscle & nerves & is perfection. All users delighted.

Investigate. We also make a 30 lb. rigid Sylph. Cata. free.

Rouse-Duryea Cycle Co. _Mfrs._ 16 G st., Peoria, Ill.=

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 5.--ADVERTIs.e.m.e.nT of Duryea bicycle company, _Scientific American_, September 9, 1893.]

Going to Hartford, Connecticut, possibly on business relating to his bicycle work, Charles visited the Hartford Machine Screw Company where the Daimler-type engine was being produced,[6] but after examining it he felt it was too heavy and clumsy for his purpose. Also in Hartford he talked over the problem of a satisfactory engine with C. E. Hawley, an employee of the Pope Manufacturing Company, makers of the Columbia bicycle. Hawley, searching for a way to construct an engine that would perform in a manner similar to the Atkinson, yet would have the lightness and compactness necessary for a carriage engine, suggested an idea that Charles believed had some merit. This idea, involving the use of what the Duryeas later called a ”free piston,” was eventually to be incorporated in their first engine.[7]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 6.--J. FRANK DURYEA, about 1894, as drawn by George Giguere from a photograph. (Smithsonian photo 48335.)]

Construction Begins

Back in Chicopee again, Charles began planning his first horseless carriage. Frank later stated that they leaned heavily on the Benz patents in their work;[8] but while the later engine and transmission show evidence of this, only the Benz manner of placing the engine and the flywheel seem to have been employed in the original Duryea plan.

Charles reversed the engine so that the flywheel was to the front, rather than to the rear as in the Benz patent, but made use of Benz'

vertical crankshaft so that the flywheel rotated in a horizontal plane.

Previously most engines had used vertical flywheels; Benz, believing that this practice would cause difficulty in steering a propelled carriage, explained his reason for changing this feature in his U.S.

patent 385087, issued June 26, 1888:

In motors. .h.i.therto used the fly-wheels have been attached to a horizontal shaft or axle, and have thus been made to revolve in a vertical plane, since the horizontal shaft is best adapted to the transmission of power. If, however, in this case we should use a heavy rotating ma.s.s, corresponding to the power employed and revolving rapidly in a vertical plane, the power to manage the vehicle or boat would become very much lessened, as the flywheel continues to revolve in its plane. I therefore so design the apparatus that its crank shaft x has a vertical position and its fly-wheel y revolves in a horizontal plane.... By this means the vehicle is not only easily controlled, but also the greatest safety is attained against capsizing.

To the Duryea plan, Benz may also have contributed the idea for positioning the countershaft, though its location is sufficiently obvious that Charles may have had no need for copying Benz. Charles wisely differed from Benz in placing the flywheel forward, thus eliminating the need for the long driving belt of the Benz carriage. Yet he did reject the bevel gears used by Benz, which might well have been retained, as Frank was later to prove by designing a workable transmission that incorporated such bevel gears. The initial plan, as conceived by Charles, also included the details of the axles, steering gear, countershaft with its friction-drum, the 2-piece angle-iron frame upon which the countershaft bearings were mounted, and the free piston engine with its ignition tube, since hot-tube ignition was to be employed. No provision was made, however, for a burner to heat the tube; nor had a carburetor been designed, though it had been decided not to use a surface tank carburetor. The plans called for no m.u.f.fler or starting arrangement.[9] Many engines of the period were started simply by turning the flywheel with the hands, and Charles felt this method was sufficient for his carriage.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 7.--DRAWING SHOWING PRINCIPLE of the Atkinson engine; this feature is what the Duryeas were trying to achieve with their free-piston engine, by subst.i.tuting the free piston for the unusual linkage of the Atkinson. (Smithsonian photo H3263-A.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGURE 8.--DRAWING OF 1885 BENZ engine, showing similarity in general appearance to Duryea engine. From Karl Benz und sein Lebenswerk, Stuttgart, 1953. (Daimler-Benz Company publication.)]

The Ames plant customarily had a summer shutdown during August; thus, during August of 1891 Charles and Frank had access to a nearly empty plant in which they could carry on experiments and make up working drawings of the proposed vehicle. It cannot now be conclusively stated whether any parts were made for the car during August or the remainder of the year. It is more likely that the brothers attempted to complete a set of drawings. Frank Harrington, chief draftsman at Ames, may have helped out at this time; from Charles' statement of April 14, 1937, it is learned that he did prepare drawings during 1892.

=C. BENZ.

SELF PROPELLING VEHICLE.

No. 385,087. Patented June 26, 1888.=

<script>