Let me guess, you know a 68yo working for Merc who was 3½ when the Russians entered the Reichstag: would you like him sent to prison?

Apologies for going OT Buttoneer, but honestly ...

I agree with the point that Merc has no active members who were involved in Nazi stuff, but saying "zero employees who were alive at the end of the war" is just wrong.

I believe some of the comments regarding Mercedes history is not understood in context. Whether they agreed with the Third Reich or not, they did what the what they were told to do, end of story!

Just a general comment - in the 1930s the wealthy families behind the corporates more often than not strongly supported the fascist parties for the simple reason that the fascists were seen as a stopgap for a communist takeover like had just happened in Russia. The danger of communists taking over in several central European states were seen imminent and only the active support from the capital owners - also which probably was the key factor - helped the fascist/autoritarian parties crush the communist parties and take over instead. "Wealth" supporting more or less fascist parties was also not only just European, but an international phenomenon.

From the corporate / capital owner POV at the time (1920s-30s) it was a no brainer though - communists were an immediate threat for their very survival, both in financial terms and also with considerable probability very much at personal level as well, so their basic stance was more than understandable. Of course for some of them just being left alone doing business would have been enough, but some went much much further with their support and not because they were told to - every corporate had people with all kinds of thoughts and views. But as has been said, those thoughts and views were the product of very different times and the people today are not the same as those people were.

So historically the Silver Arrow theme was originated by stripping off the heavy paint and thus loose weight of a racing car. The silver is the metallic chassis under the paint.

Mercedes should bring the concept to the 2000's... they indeed should be black like carbon fibre.

So historically the Silver Arrow theme was originated by stripping off the heavy paint and thus loose weight of a racing car. The silver is the metallic chassis under the paint.

It's debatable that this ever happened. There's a lot of evidence against it and most of the evidence for it comes from Alfred Neubauer, a well-known raconteur and embellisher of the truth.

In anycase the chassis will be painted in clear pain to protect the process of oxidization... so this is pointless...

It's debatable that this ever happened. There's a lot of evidence against it and most of the evidence for it comes from Alfred Neubauer, a well-known raconteur and embellisher of the truth.

Next week at Jerez, it looks like Mike Conway and Marcus Ericsson will test, according to the Jerez Circuit site:
http://www.circuitodejerez.com/es/docsentrenaf11209.cfm

So historically the Silver Arrow theme was originated by stripping off the heavy paint and thus loose weight of a racing car.

The story of the striped white paint was published in the Stars Magazine, the Mercedes official one.

I'd be temped to trust TNF members over and above a lot of printed press actually.

That doesn't make it true. The race in which this supposedly happened had no weight limit.

That does make the official story Mercedes wants to advertise.

As mentioned by Michael Muller and Ludvigsen, it was perfectly feasible to strip the paint overnight.
And the filler over a beaten alloy [with several imperfections] and several layers of white paint could weight 2kgs.

White was the collor imposed by FIA to the German manufacturers. Just because Auto Union used it before, it doesn't prevent Mercedes from using it too.

In the above mentioned thread in nostalgia forum someone finded out that it was not true (the myth states that the car was over the weight limit, so they strip off the paint).

If it is a myth it has successfully made it's way into respectable history books and TV documentaries.

Because people have assumed it to be true and repeated it over and over again. As with Captain Kirk saying "Beam me up Scotty." And as with ostriches burying their heads in the sand.

Yes, it was feasible to strip the paint overnight. But Mercedes-Benz weren't stupid and would likely have stripped the paint earlier if they needed to. Besides, the race in question at AVUS had no maximum weight anyway.

Look at photos of the W25. It always has a highly reflective finish, even in photos from the initial presentation to the press. The lack of metallic or high-gloss paints at the time points to the W25s being bare metal. I don't believe a W25 was ever painted white.

Mercedes buys into your team and you were on vacation. How does that fit?

Brawn: The contracts were signed earlier. I was able to go on holiday with a clear conscience. During the presentation I did not have to be there.

Are you a rich man now?
Brawn: I am rich because I have a great family. I'm not driven by money. It's a long-term agreement with Mercedes, and there's no money flowing to my bank account from one day to another. I can't go lie on the beach tomorrow.

What changed for you?
Brawn: I can now focus more on the development of the car and the team instead of looking for sponsors to get the team going. And I can work on integrating Mercedes technology into our technical package.

Are you not afraid that with manufacturer ownership you will loose some authority?
Brawn: Mercedes has chosen us because we work efficiently. We will proceed in the engine department in Brixworth on the same principle as a Mercedes customer. Therefore, we fit together wonderfully. We want to benefit from Mercedes in areas where they are good. For example, processes in quality assurance. We can offer a team that now has an order of magnitude that is required from all teams by the end of 2010. While our opponents need to devote much energy to lower their workforce to 350 employees, we can concentrate on the development of the car.

Has the duel with Red Bull hampered the preparation of the 2010 cars?
Brawn: We have sacrificed only an extra week in the wind tunnel for the 2009 model. Since mid-season, we have concentrated more on next year's car. You must not forget that we had this year a rather small team. Our resources were limited and we had to concentrate on 2010. Of course, the temptation to respond to the Redbull offensive and give up on 2010 was great, but we did not let that get to us.

Mercedes wants to make Formula 1 a profit center. Is this realistic?
Brawn: That is possible because the revenue stream from Bernie Ecclestone has risen for us, because Mercedes is such a strong brand is that it will be easier to find good sponsors. At the same time we have reduced costs. We will be able to work cost-neutral in the near future in any case.

Jenson Button moves to rival McLaren. What have you done wrong?
Brawn: His decision is a disappointment for me because we worked well together. What is even more telling is that it was not the money. Finally, our offer was even more attractive than that of McLaren. [We then eventually cut the ripcord.] It makes no sense to employ a driver who would not be happy with his choice. We offered him what we could offer him. We have already reached at the extreme limit. Further negotiations would have led to nothing.

Why?
Brawn: Because Jenson obviously looking for the excitement of driving in the same car against Lewis Hamilton. This is courageous, and I have to respect that. It makes no sense to hold a driver who would not be happy with us because he sees a bigger challenge elsewhere.

And what are you doing now?
Brawn: Exploring the market and try to make the best choice. Hasty decisions make no sense. Our cockpit is the most attractive on the market. Anyone who is serious, is waiting.

My attempt at the translation of an AMuS interview with Ross Brawn:

Gentleman, I really am very concerned for the racing team of my beloved brand.

I think we're ****ed.

Gentleman, I really am very concerned for the racing team of my beloved brand.

I'm an ex-Mac fan, due their long partnership with Merc. But now that Merc has changed their interests, I had to as well as I'm a fan of Mercedes first and foremost.

Problem is, at Mac, I had the luxury of being fairly confident that they'll do a good job. It's a big team with prestige and heritage and a proven track record of making race winners. Basically, I trusted them to do a good job. And they've always had the drivers. Recent memory: Hakkinen, Coulthard, Raikonnen, Montoya, Alonso, Hamilton. They've always had proven race winners (or at least one proven race winner).

The aspects that worry me are about MercGP's situation is:

1. Honda/Brawn stopped development of their stillborn 2008 challenger early and used that time to develop this year's Brawn car. This, in combination with the rule changes of this year, ensured that they had a very good headstart in understanding the new rules and implementing them this year. Hence their total dominance at the start.

2. Drivers. I was filled with dismay when I saw Kimi joined the WRC. I was really hoping that he'd join Merc. My heart is now hoping for Michael Schu, but I don't think it's going to happen. So, likely, were stuck with (not-so-) Quick Nick. And that's my biggest worry. Merc GP LACKS CREDIBLE DRIVERS.

The Mac drivers are both proven race winners and between them have 583 points and 18 wins
The Ferrari drivers are both proven race winners and betweent them have 897 points and 32 wins

The Merc drivers have no race wins and between them have 294.5 points and 0 wins

Yes, yes, I know the situation at the start of this season was very much the same. But at least then we could have made up for it by having a head start on the new rules. Now, everyone is on the same level. And yes, we did allegedly start early with this years car. But seriously, how far could we have gotten? AFAIK, we had a pretty shitty budget, whatwith the almost no sponsors thing. So I doubt that the budget allowed a big enough advantage, with regard to research, that we made up enough ground developing a car according to the rules, the rules that EVERYONE now understands. I'm pretty sure that Ferrari/McLaren can make up that development in a week with their capacity for development.

IMHO, our only hope was to get a driver that can outperform the car and really get the team behind them (not by being a really really swell guy, but with results) and give them something to fight for. Kimi was one option and he bailed. Michael was another, but come on, seriously?

I think we're ****ed.

The Mac drivers are both proven race winners and between them have 583 points and 18 wins
The Ferrari drivers are both proven race winners and betweent them have 897 points and 32 wins

BS

I will put my money on Ross Brawn anytime. And maybe if you are really a merc fan, you could hace some faith in them.

Did you consider they are proven race winners, because they simply had the car that allowed them to prove they could win a race?

2. Drivers. I was filled with dismay when I saw Kimi joined the WRC. I was really hoping that he'd join Merc. My heart is now hoping for Michael Schu, but I don't think it's going to happen. So, likely, were stuck with (not-so-) Quick Nick. And that's my biggest worry. Merc GP LACKS CREDIBLE DRIVERS.

I feel The Schu really is an option.

Did you consider they are proven race winners, because they simply had the car that allowed them to prove they could win a race?

If Merc deliver a car capable of it, then Heidfeld will be a title contender.

He had such a car in 2008. And what ?? ...... Nothing. Kubica was the one who achieved first PP and first win for BMW. Not Heidfeldt.

Yes. I did as a matter of fact.

Did you ever consider why they had a decent car? Because they DESERVED it.

EDIT: Sorry, didn't mean to sound so confrontational.

He had such a car in 2008. And what ?? ...... Nothing. Kubica was the one who achieved first PP and first win for BMW. Not Heidfeldt.

Did you consider they are proven race winners, because they simply had the car that allowed them to prove they could win a race?

If they have won races, they are proven winners. Simple as that. Who didn't have the car to show that, we can only speculate who can win, but proven winners they are not.