Email To Car And Driver

[olorin]

I emailed the Car and Driver Editor on the 11th of September:

• To whom it may concern,
  I bring your attention to the comparison test published in the October 2005 issue ("$35,000 Sport Sedans", pp 94-112), and specifically, the results table on page 112. It has been noted by myself and others that there seems to be a discrepancy in the totals in almost all of the columns.
  The points proximity between the top two cars tested--the BMW 330i and Lexus IS350--prompted the attempt to verify the grand totals of each. It was found that the 330i's total under the "Vehicle" section was miscalculated by one point (where it should have been 74 instead of 75). As a result, the grand total for the 330i is identical to that of the IS350, at 212 points, earning the Lexus a tied first place (going by points).
  I took the liberty of checking the entire results table, and found eight similar miscalculations. Please find attached an image scanned from page 112, with the miscalculated figures crossed out and replaced by the correct ones.
  The table is fairly straight forward: a number of sections made up of individual (subjectively or objectively) tested parameters. Each section has a total (unless there is only a single parameter), implying the addition of the points earned for each parameter. Likewise, there is a grand total, implying the addition of the points stipulated by each total (or in principle, the sum of all points earned for each parameter).
  It would seem that one of the following two scenarios is true. Either:
  1) The results table contains several miscalculations leading to the incorrect finishing order of the Lexus IS350 (no other cars were affected in terms of their finishing order), or
  2) The totals and grand totals stipulated in the results table are not actually intended to be accurate totals or grand totals (in relation to the points stipulated in the results table).
  This, as one might expect, has resulted in great cause for concern, and I find myself wondering if Car and Driver have published other comparison results tables containing similar miscalculations and--possibly--incorrect finishing orders.
  We eagerly await Car and Driver's response.
  Best regards
  Olorin
  
  

I sent a follow-up email on the 19th after receiving no response:

• To whom it may concern,
  I am disappointed to have received no response on this issue. It has been over a week since the email was sent.
  Regards
  Olorin
  

I then received a reply on the 22nd:

• Olorin:
  We respond in the print magazine in the Backfires section, look there for a possible response in the months to come, be assured your email has been included for review by the Editor.
  Regards,
  Scott
  

[steviej]

don't be surprised if their responce or resolve is a rework/reprint the numbers in the table so that the totals stay as printed. If this is so, then an entire article reprint would have to be published. That would not be good for their credibility.

steviej

[Lexusfreak]

I emailed the Car and Driver Editor on the 11th of September:

• To whom it may concern,
  I bring your attention to the comparison test published in the October 2005 issue ("$35,000 Sport Sedans", pp 94-112), and specifically, the results table on page 112. It has been noted by myself and others that there seems to be a discrepancy in the totals in almost all of the columns.
  The points proximity between the top two cars tested--the BMW 330i and Lexus IS350--prompted the attempt to verify the grand totals of each.  It was found that the 330i's total under the "Vehicle" section was miscalculated by one point (where it should have been 74 instead of 75). As a result, the grand total for the 330i is identical to that of the IS350, at 212 points, earning the Lexus a tied first place (going by points).
  I took the liberty of checking the entire results table, and found eight similar miscalculations.  Please find attached an image scanned from page 112, with the miscalculated figures crossed out and replaced by the correct ones.
  The table is fairly straight forward: a number of sections made up of individual (subjectively or objectively) tested parameters.  Each section has a total (unless there is only a single parameter), implying the addition of the points earned for each parameter.  Likewise, there is a grand total, implying the addition of the points stipulated by each total (or in principle, the sum of all points earned for each parameter).
  It would seem that one of the following two scenarios is true.  Either:
  1) The results table contains several miscalculations leading to the incorrect finishing order of the Lexus IS350 (no other cars were affected in terms of their finishing order), or
  2) The totals and grand totals stipulated in the results table are not actually intended to be accurate totals or grand totals (in relation to the points stipulated in the results table).
  This, as one might expect, has resulted in great cause for concern, and I find myself wondering if Car and Driver have published other comparison results tables containing similar miscalculations and--possibly--incorrect finishing orders.
  We eagerly await Car and Driver's response.
  Best regards
  Olorin
  
  

I sent a follow-up email on the 19th after receiving no response:

• To whom it may concern,
  I am disappointed to have received no response on this issue.  It has been over a week since the email was sent.
  Regards
  Olorin
  

I then received a reply on the 22nd:

• Olorin:
  We respond in the print magazine in the Backfires section, look there for a possible response in the months to come, be assured your email has been included for review by the Editor.
  Regards,
  Scott
  

←

Good catch olorin! B) Maybe they might print your catch in their next issue or two......looks like the new IS indeed should have come out on top afterall! ;) Nicely done!