I finally got my subscription issue of Road & Track (Feb. 1999 issue) and read the six-way affordable sports sedan comparison test. <p>While I don't think it would change the outcome (BMW 328i finishing first, followed by A4 2.8 quattro, Saab 9-3 SE, Acura 3.2TL, MB C280 and Volvo S70 T5), I have a problem with how they score one of the categories, namely 'as tested price'. Since this category accounts for 150 out of a total of 500 points, it could easily change the outcome.<p>My problem is that each of these cars came with different levels of standard and optional equipmet. For example, the 328i only has the sport package, metallic paint and leather seats as options for a grand total of $37,434. The1998 A4 2.8 quattro used in the test comes with the Bose audi package, power moonroof, sport package, sport seats, all-weather package, and trip computer for a grand total of $34,710. Granted that the A4 is missing leather seats and 17" wheels/tires compared to the 328i used in the test. But here is what the 328i is lacking in equipment compared to the A4, and BMW's prices for the options:<p>Power moonroof $1050<br>Wood trim $500<br>Premium stereo (Harman Kardon $675) plus CD changer (say $400)<br>Fold down rear seats and ski sack $575<br>Heated seats $500<p>I think you can see that the price differential between comparably equipped models will be much more than the $2724 used in the scoring system. <p>There are differences among the other contestents as well. All I am saying is that if they are going to use price as a major component of their testing and name their winner based on points, they should judge the cars on an equal basis. <p>Again, I still think the BMW 328i would have beaten the Audi, but the margin would have been smaller.

I picked up a recent road test, from a BMW dealership, between the Mercedes Benz C Class, Audi A4, Alfa Romeo 156, and BMW 328i. The results in the test made me laugh. They did everything they could to belittle the Audi as far as "ergonomics" and other flashy buzz words but the facts were right there. The Audi was quicker, had more torque, same horsepower but a lighter car, had more standard equipment, and was quite a bit cheaper, but since it was in a BMW showroom the BMW was still ranked ahead of the Audi.<p>Oh well, that's life. I wonder how the BMWs are doing in all this snow? My Audi is great.<p>Mark<br>1996 A4 2.8