How do I cancel my Motor Trend subscription? That's right, the legendary car magazine that's been around for more than 60 years. I just read the October 2010 issue, in which executive editor Edward Loh compares the 2011 Mustang GT with the 2011 BMW M3.

His conclusion? BMW wins. No surprise there. How can anyone think a $40K American car could compete with a $67K Autobahn-driving machine?

Yet when I took apart the objective details, I began to suspect Motor Trend chose the BMW. Drill down to the basics, and objectively, doesn't it look like the Mustang won--and won convincingly?

1. The Mustang is within two horsepower of the BMW.
2. The Mustang has 390 lb.-ft. of torque; the BMW has 295 lb.-ft.
3. The Mustang requires 2.7 turns lock to lock. The BMW? 2.8.
4. Pro driver Randy Pobst gives the Mustang a "B" in steering feel, but an "A" in quickness.
5. The Mustang has more mid-range torque than the BMW.
6. Pobst mentions that the BMW understeers more (much more) than the Mustang --and that took the fun out of driving it.
7. He also says the Mustang tests better and costs less.
8. In the instrumented tests, with Motor Trend's Edward Loh at the wheel, the Mustang and BMW clocked identical 4.4-second zero-to-60 times. But the Mustang covered the quarter mile quicker by a tenth of a second (12.7 seconds versus 12.8 seconds for the BMW).
9. In 60-0 braking, the Mustang stops in 108 feet. The BMW takes 110 feet.
10. Lateral acceleration is .95g for the BMW, but .97g for the Mustang.
11. Even the interior of the BMW was criticized: "The murdered-out cabin is blah to some."

In my opinion, the Mustang was clearly the better car, hands down. And I'll mention again that it costs $27,000 less than the BMW--or, as it was described in Motor Trend, the price of another Mustang. Apparently, if it costs more and it's imported... it must be better. Except when it's not.

Does this sort of review do readers any good?