mcgahan's correct, and so is cisco...

in his post:

http://blog.ine.com/2011/04/04/understanding-ospf-external-route-path-selection/

he continues to prove the e1 link is preferred...

if you look back on this earlier post i did there is this:

http://insearchofthecert.blogspot.com/2012/08/e1-v-e2.html

E1 vs. E2 External Routes

External routes fall under two categories, external type 1 and external type 2. The difference between the two is in the way the cost (metric) of the route is being calculated. The cost of a type 2 route is always the external cost, irrespective of the interior cost to reach that route. A type 1 cost is the addition of the external cost and the internal cost used to reach that route. A type 1 route is always preferred over a type 2 route for the same destination. This is illustrated in the following diagram:


 so what he's getting at is there is an implication in certain texts that because e2's do not include the internal cost (additional cost), e2's will be preferred over e1's... clearly not the case according to these two sources...

now it's bugging me that i can't seem to get the round trip back...

so i got rid of the type 1 on r4...

r1#sh ip route 6.6.6.6            
Routing entry for 6.6.6.0/24
  Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20, type extern 2, forward metric 782
  Last update from 10.1.1.2 on FastEthernet0/0, 00:00:15 ago
  Routing Descriptor Blocks:
  * 10.1.2.2, from 192.168.2.2, 00:00:38 ago, via FastEthernet1/1
      Route metric is 20, traffic share count is 1
    10.1.1.2, from 192.168.1.2, 00:00:15 ago, via FastEthernet0/0
      Route metric is 20, traffic share count is 1

back to squares...

note the forward metric returned to 782, and the route metrics are equal...

it's taking the 2's back and forth again, now that there is no e1 type...

 Record route:
   (172.16.2.1)
   (192.168.2.2)
   (10.1.2.2)
   (10.1.2.1)
   (10.1.2.1)
   (192.168.2.1)
   (172.16.2.2)
   (172.16.2.1) <*>

i restarted redistribution on both with clear ip ospf redist, r4 only slightly before, and now the preferred path is the one's... makes sense...

Record route:
   (172.16.1.1)
   (192.168.1.2)
   (10.1.1.2)
   (10.1.1.1)
   (10.1.1.1)
   (192.168.1.1)
   (172.16.1.2)
   (172.16.1.1) <*>

cef to the rescue... i added ip load-sharing per-packet on f0/0... don't use it for voice though... use per destination for voice...

 Record route:
   (10.1.1.1)
   (192.168.1.1)
   (172.16.1.2)
   (172.16.1.1)
   (172.16.2.1)
   (192.168.2.2)
   (10.1.2.2)
   (10.1.2.1) <*>

Record route:
   (10.1.2.1)
   (192.168.2.1)
   (172.16.2.2)
   (172.16.2.1)
   (172.16.1.1)
   (192.168.1.2)
   (10.1.1.2)
   (10.1.1.1) <*>

i have one's and two's again...