Behind the Wheel: 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander

the amazing keithmobile-DTo keep this “Behind the Wheel” series going I thought I’d mix things up a bit and give some thoughts on cars I’ve actually owned, as opposed to ones I’ve just driven for short periods of time.

We’ll begin this little mini-series with my current car, a 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander XLS AWD (which I affectionately call “The Keithmobile-D”).

To start with, the Mitsubishi Outlander is… a kind of a weird little car/SUV/thing – and I’m not just talking about its odd front nose & hood bulge. The Outlander is a strange mix of stylish “tall station wagon” city SUV and hard-working and reasonably capable “utility vehicle.”

wet mitsubishi logoThen again, I suppose this shouldn’t be a surprise, since Mitsubishi itself is kind of an oddball car company, with precious few models compared to some of the bigger car companies – especially here in the US, and especially nowadays when they basically only have 3 models – the Lancer, the Outlander, and the Mirage. But Mitsubishi has always had to live under the shadow of the bigger companies – Toyota, Honda, Mazda, and especially Subaru.

But let’s rewind back to 2003: Mitsubishi has always had a kind of competition with Subaru, what with the whole EVO vs. WRX thing. For a while there this almost seemed like it would carry over into other models, too – with the Outlander poised to compete with the Subaru Outback (right down to the similar-sounding name). Though in my opinion, the Outlander seemed more like the Forrester at the time, since it is a bit of a taller wagon/SUV shape than the decidedly station-wagon-shaped Outback.

The Outlander is kind of a weird mashup of parts from Mitsubishi’s stable of previous vehicles – the chassis is derived from that of the Lancer, but the engine is the same as the one from the Eclipse & Galant. Specifically, it chugs along thanks to a 2.4L 4-cylinder  Mitsubishi “Sirius” 4G64 direct-injection engine, which produces a somewhat underwhelming 140 HP (at 5,000 RPM) but a respectable 157 lbs-ft of torque at just 2,500 RPM. That said, the Outlander weighs just a hair under 3,500 lbs, which is a bit hefty for a car of its size, and which means it’s certainly not the fastest thing on the road – but it’s not the slowest thing, either.

It does have 4-wheel independent suspension, and it handles the bumps quite well – much better, in fact, than some more modern cars. Driving on some old cobblestone streets in New York City can be downright painful in modern cars with their stiff suspensions, but the Outlander just soaks up the bumps without much fuss or bother.

rear tail light 2Despite the somewhat soft suspension, it does handle quite well with relatively little body roll (thanks to ample anti-roll and anti-sway bars). Although the steering suffers from the usual horrible Mitsubishi turning radius, it is well balanced with plenty of feedback – there’s no problem at all just diving right into some tight corners. In fact, the Outlander is really quite fun in the corners, despite technically being an SUV. It also helps that it’s not a terribly tall vehicle, either.

Despite only having a 4-speed automatic transmission (manuals were made, but not available in the US until later model years) it does have a semi-manual mode so you can (kind of) row through the gears on your own.

One downside to the Outlander is its brakes – they are rather lame, especially by modern standards. At the time, anti-lock brakes were an option, and the 2003 models were only available with front discs and rear drums – it wasn’t until the slightly revised 2004 model that they got 4-wheel disc brakes.

With 8.3 inches of ground clearance the Outlander does reasonably well off-road (compared to other car-based SUVs), although it really is more of a “soft-roader” than an “off-roader.” Plus, though it has AWD (full-time via a center viscous coupling unit with a 50/50 front/rear split) the front & rear differentials themselves are fully open, so it isn’t meant for true hardcore off-roading.

One thing the Outlander does have going for it is utility – it is a very useful car. Unlike some other small SUVs it seats a full 5 people without any trouble and yet still has plenty of room in the back for stuff. Fold down the seats and the Outlander can carry an impressive amount of stuff. Also unlike a lot of modern small car-based SUVs, the Outlander can still tow – although not very much, thanks to its lackluster brakes.

It also has one of the best instrument clusters I’ve seen in recent years – easy to read in both full sun and at night, regardless of whether you have the headlights (and thus, the backlights for the gauges) turned on or not.

keithmobile instrument cluster at night

All in all the Outlander is a well-designed, well-thought-out little SUV, which I think could have done quite well. Sadly, however, very few people bought the Outlander, and in subsequent years Mitsubishi enlarged it, making it into a bigger, heavier, more expensive people-mover SUV. (The current model Outlanders come with 3 rows of seats, for example, along with  lower ground clearance, and a price nearly twice what they were originally.) Mitsubishi used to have a larger SUV, called the “Endeavor,” which fit in the next segment above the Outlander, but it looks like that’s been removed and the Outlander was pushed up into its spot – leaving no small SUV to take its place.

If Mitsubishi had stuck with the same body size, and added a stick shift & a turbocharged engine as an option (both of which were available in other markets worldwide, just not in the US), I think the Outlander would’ve been a hit. But since they didn’t, we’re left with just a few examples of what could have been.

Still, if you’re in the market for a small, fun, useful SUV and don’t want to pay a lot, a used Outlander from 2003-2006 might be worth looking at. If it’s in good shape and has been taken care of, an Outlander is a great alternative to one of its Subaru contemporaries – and probably at a lower price. I know I’m biased, but I’ve been very happy with my Outlander – I bought mine new in 2003, and as of this writing it just ticked over 190,000 miles with no sign of slowing down.

Here’s to that SUV with the funny looking nose from Mitsubishi!

Things I Wish I’d Known When I Started Programming

codeI’ve been programming for more than a few years now, but sometimes I like to look back at things I wrote when I was much younger, and reflect on how much I’ve learned since then. Of course, no one expects you to start out knowing everything, but there are a few things I wish I’d known when I started, or that I’d learned a bit sooner than I did. So, just for fun I thought I’d come up with a list of a few of the things I wish I’d known when I started programming.

Use Source Code/Revision Control

Like a lot of young developers, when I first started writing code I didn’t use any sort of source code/revision control system (just zipping up the project files every so often doesn’t count). But once I did, I realized how wrong I’d been – having a complete history of all changes is just sooooooooo helpful, even without any of the other features (branches, merging, etc.).

Now, there is a bit of a learning curve with any revision control system, and when you’re just starting out that learning curve can be a bit steep, especially in addition to all the other stuff you’re learning at the same time – but it is so worth the time and effort. Being able to undo changes, or make different changes to the same code (via branches), and just in general having a nice, detailed history of what you’ve done and what’s changed over time is simply invaluable. This is especially true if you’re part of a multiple programmer team, but it’s also just as true if you’re working by yourself.

For anything beyond 5-minute throw-away projects, use source code revision control!

Write Comments So That You’ll Understand Them Months or Years Later

Writing comments is like writing a log entry that you’ll inevitably need to review much, much, much later – so taking the time to write it clearly is well worth it. Countless times I’ve run across old comments of mine and wondered “what was I thinking?”

Same goes for commit messages – brevity may be the soul of wit, but not when it comes to commit messages! You shouldn’t need to do a diff on a particular commit just to figure out what you did; the commit message should at least give you a general idea.

On the flip side, though, you don’t want to be writing novels in your comments or commit messages, either – so write enough to be understood, but don’t be needlessly wordy, either.

Automate the Build & Deployment

It doesn’t matter how many times you’ve gone through the process of compiling or deploying a build, someday you will forget a step. And it’s also just so nice to be able to kick off a complete build & deploy with a single click and then go grab a cup of coffee or something, instead of having to sit there and go through all the steps manually. So take the time to write a script to automate the process – it doesn’t need to be super-complicated, just something to do the work for you. Believe me, it’s worth it.

No Fix or Change is Ever Too Small to Not Test

Also known as “TEST EVERYTHING,” this one’s a hard rule to stick too, especially for really small things like changing a typo in some text – but you still have to do it. It might seem like a tiny change that couldn’t possibly cause any problems anywhere else – but code is complicated, and complexity breeds bugs in the weirdest ways. Maybe that little text change you made causes a display issue at higher DPI settings, or when using a different font – you won’t know until you test it.

If You Find a Problem, no Matter How Small,  Put it in the Bug Tracker!

When making a fix – even for a small, seemingly insignificant problem – if it’s in production code (or in a released beta build), you’d better be writing up a bug report for it. Just making a comment in your SVN commit log isn’t enough – you need a proper report that can be searched and found and referenced, because someday, maybe years from now, you’ll need to know how or why you made this change.

(I will make an exception here to “fixing a typo” text-only changes, but only just.)

Always Write a Spec (But Don’t Write a Novel)

Just as fixing (seemingly) simple bugs can have unexpected consequences, designing and adding simple features or changes can turn out to be unexpected complicated. Writing a spec – even if it’s just a quick outline on paper or on a whiteboard – can help immensely in heading off these unexpected complexities. (Or, at the very least, you’ll know there are complexities and can design around them.) Good software should always be designed first, then coded – and writing a specification is part of the designing step (if not the entirety of it).

At the same time though you don’t need to write a novel’s worth of specifications, even for complicated changes or features. If the spec is too long (or goes into too much detail) then no one will read it – yourself included. If your spec just has to be that long, then maybe the feature or change you’re planning should be broken down into smaller parts first. Finding the right balance between length & specificity is a skill that takes practice to get right, but it’s one that’s worth learning.


These are just some of the things I wish I’d known when I started programming all those years ago – if you have things you wish you’d known, feel free to share them in the comments!

Behind the Wheel: 2013 Mini Cooper Convertible

Mini Cooper ConvertableLast year while on my way to visit family in Australia I found myself with a 1-day layover in Los Angeles (due to some flight delays). Rather than spend the day cooped up in an airport hotel, my wife and I decided to do a little exploring – so we rented a car for the day, and the car we ended up with (that my wife picked out, actually) was a Mini Cooper convertible.

We didn’t have a lot of time to really play with this car, but I did end up driving it both in city traffic and up into the hills around the city, and I have to say – I understand why people like this car.

One thing that I did notice was the harsh suspension – every bump made the car seem to rattle and was felt right up your spine. I suppose this isn’t that surprising, given how low the car is and how tight the suspension has to be, but it was still rather distracting at times.

But, the cornering, oh my goodness, the cornering! I’ve heard the expression “corners like it’s on rails,” but this car really drove home what that means.

Steering, however, although easy, was not particularly great, though I’m hard pressed to explain why. It might have been just a little bit too lose, requiring just a little bit too much steering input to make a turn than I personally felt was necessary. Or maybe it was that the steering wheel felt slightly too large for such a small car.

Like most rentals, this was an automatic – which is a shame – but overall the performance was spirited and fun, though not quite knock-your-socks-off amazing.

Though the Mini is certainly a small car, it’s not quite as small as you might think. I wouldn’t want to try and cram 4 people into one, but it’s not at all tight for just 2 people.

All in all, the Mini is a fun little car, good for having a bit of fun in the corners while still nimble enough to navigate tight city streets like a pro, and has a fair amount of space for stuff (considering its size). I certainly wouldn’t turn my nose up at it if I had the chance to drive one again!

Behind the Wheel: 2014 Fiat 500L (Diesel)

Earlier this year while I was in Italy on vacation with some of the Australian side of the family, we rented a car to travel up to Lake Como in northern Italy. Unsurprisingly, the car we ended up with was a Fiat – but in this case, it was the new 4-door version, the 500L.

Fiat 500L

I’d driven a Fiat 500 before, but the 500L was something new. I was actually glad to see it – I knew from experience that fitting 4 adults into the 2-door 500 would not have been a pleasant experience, especially for the long drive we had ahead of us.

italy route map - milan to lake comoThis particular 500L was also a diesel, and a stick shift on top of that – unlike the Audi A4 I’d driven previously in this trip – so driving it out of the city of Milan and up the narrow, twisty, winding roads around Lake Como was… an interesting experience!

But truthfully, the 500L was quite easy to drive – the steering was nimble, the brakes were solid, and the overall handling was very surefooted. The diesel took a bit of getting used to, however. Unlike a small gasoline engine, the diesel in this Fiat didn’t need to be revved up – it had plenty of power down low in the rev range.  In fact, the diesel really didn’t like being at any sort of high RPMs at all – which meant I had to spent a lot of time shifting, especially up the twisty, hilly roads around Lake Como.

The 500L fit all four adults reasonably well, as well as our bags, so it is a quite practical little car. Visibility was good, the steering was nimble, and of course the diesel means it’s quite fuel efficient.

Up around the Lake Como region are some very, VERY twisty roads, which would have been quite fun to tackle – though with 4 people in the car and traffic coming in the opposite direction, I didn’t actually get much opportunity for fun. Still, the 500L was nimble and took the corners well, and at no point was I worried about the car’s capabilities. Although at times I did find myself wishing that it was a little bit smaller – although the 500L is by no means a big car, some of those roads were still a very tight fit.

All in all the Fiat 500L is a small, practical little car, that can be fun, but takes some getting used to if you’re not accustomed to how diesel engines develop their power. For myself, I’d have preferred a gas engine, but when you rent you kind of have to take what you get – and of course in Europe diesel is much more common than here in the US.

So, if you’ve always wanted to have fun in a little Fiat 500, but wanted to be able to carry more than 2 people, the 500L is certainly not a bad choice.

Behind the Wheel: 2014 Audi A4 Wagon (Diesel)

Audi A4 WagonEarlier this year I found myself over in Florence, Italy, with family and I needed to rent a car to go for a day trip. Although I normally don’t splurge on rental cars, in this case we decided to go for a “luxury” rental – both as a slight treat to ourselves, and because we didn’t want to be crammed into an itty-bitty little car.

So, what should pull up in front of the rental place but a 2014 Audi A4 wagon… with a diesel engine, no less!

Right off the bat this car surprised me – the diesel was excellent – smooth and quiet, to the point where at first I didn’t realize it was a diesel! Highway driving was easy, but uninspiring. Plenty of power on tap from the diesel engine, but it isn’t overwhelming – or exciting. That said, it’s got more than enough “oomph” for near effortless passing at speed. City driving was also surprisingly nimble, though in Italy – and especially in the narrow streets of Florence – the A4 was almost too big.

The interior was a very comfortable place to be – and it carried 4 adults on a long road trip up to the Chianti region with no fuss at all. I can definitely understand why people like this sort of car as a daily driver – it’s comfortable, the in-dash navigation is great, and it has plenty of room inside.

On the other hand, it’s not exactly what you’d call a “driver’s car.” Although there was plenty of power from the diesel, there wasn’t exactly an abundance of it, either. Everything about how it drives was smooth, gentle, and reassuring – not in the least bit exciting.

All in all, not a bad car by any means, and one I’d happily drive again as a rental, but not one I’d want to own.