2009 Mitsubishi Lancer DE

Another Japanese compact car, will this one be as good as the Mazda?


Introduction: The Mitsubishi Lancer is actually a vehicle that Mitsubishi made for quite some time all the way back from 1973. Older generations of the Lancer have been sold as Dodge Colts, while the United States saw the 4th generation Lancer. Canada did not have access to any Mitsubishi unless Dodge put its badge and sold the vehicles that way. Canada only got the true Mitsubishi Lancer when it was in its 7th generation. The current Mitsubishi Lancer is in its 8th generation hoping to make a break through in the most competitive segment of cars.

This is one of the last few vehicles I managed to drive and this was the only one that I had no opportunity to drive in order for me to get the chance to drive every single vehicle sold in this segment. I was happy to see I finally got the chance to drive a Lancer a few months ago when I thought the only Mitsubishis I would drive are the Outlander and Endeavor.


Performance: The base Mitsubishi Lancers are given a 2.0L 4-cylinder engine that produces 152 hp and 146 lb.ft of torque, making this one of the most powerful base vehicles available. The engine is one of the GEMA models that I mentioned in the Caliber reviews. The Lancer is also given a CVT to be paired with this engine much like the Chryslers. The acceleration is reasonable with a 0-100 km/h time of about 8.9 seconds, it is claimed the car is much faster without the CVT. The engine however isn't as refined as the Mazda 3's and in order to get it moving its a bit buzzy.

My Score: 7/10 - Decent power, decent acceleration but noisy and with the right transmission could be quicker.

Handling: The Mitsubishi Lancer's handling was really a big question mark for me when dreaming of driving it. So after taking it for a decent drive, I can say it handled pretty good all things considered. Its not as brilliant as the Mazda 3 but I do prefer this over the Honda Civic. The steering feel is not as electric as the Mazda either but its got a decent amount of feel to make driving the car around corners pretty enjoyable. Not a brilliant car like the Mazda 3 but a pretty competent one in this area.

My Score: 8/10 - Good handling, decent steering feel but still outclassed by Mazda


Interior: This is the area that always concerns me about Mitsubishi. I know their engineers are clever but I don't think they make very presentable interiors. While it doesn't have the feel of being very cheap like a Chrysler, its still not enough to excuse the hard plastics all over the car. The somewhat digital dash however does make it a tad better. In the end its pretty bland and not what I'd hope for. Interior space is reasonable and about equal with cars of similar size like the Mazda 3. The Lancer is made in Japan, once again I'm amazed but it seems the Japanese do a pretty good job at assembling cars because I haven't found the build quality flaws I always find on a Chrysler.

My Score: 6/10 - Bland interior, disappointing materials but neat gauges and its well built

Styling: Normally Japanese cars are not very good looking and usually end up being pretty generic for the times. This Mitsubishi Lancer is a very attractive vehicle, its aggressive all over from the head lights to even the tail lights. Normally I don't like the high trunk line but I'll forgive this because the rest of the car looks so good. This is clearly the best looking car in the segment.

My Score: 10/10 - Great exterior styling

Value for the money: Mitsubishi is not normally a company that is often mentioned and in some ways its a shame because the Lancer is a good looking car. It doesn't do anything terrible like some other cars ie. Corolla, Caliber, etc. Its all down to name recognition which may work in its favour since in Canada, Mitsubishi offers a very good engine warranty and the base DE lancer is pretty competitive in price to other vehicles in the segment. Its a bit expensive but might be worth your while with the 10 year warranty. If you want something that has style but is at least competent in most areas of driving that are of concern the Lancer should be something on your list to test drive.

My Score: 8/10 - Great warranty, often overlooked and a decent performer

Overall: 39/50 - If it weren't for a weak interior, this car should be on the same level as the Corolla, Civic and Mazda 3.

2007-2008 Mazda 3 GS

After quite a few Chryslers which are all bad, I think it calls for a change of mood.


Introduction: The Mazda 3 was introduced in 2004 as the Mazda Protege's replacement. The Protege was still called the 323 in a few markets and proved to be a reasonably successful car but not something that scared the leaders of the segment. Using Ford of Europe's C1 platform for the successful Euro Ford Focus, Mazda decided to use this platform for the Mazda 3. By this point Mazda dropped the original numbering scheme 323 and 626 in favour of just the 3 and the 6 while the 929 would not return with a successor. Since its introduction the Mazda 3 has become one of Mazda's all time best selling vehicles in certain markets belonged to the top 10 selling vehicles. As a global vehicle the Mazda 3 found in one location was stylistically the exact same in another car market. The Mazda 3 offered a sedan and hatchback body types, one could also buy a Mazdaspeed 3 which had a 4-cylinder turbo engine making it one of the quickest FWD hatchbacks sold in most markets. Mazda would replace the current 3 in 2010 with a new redesign, due to the old 3's success Mazda rather than totally change the vehicle decided to fine tune what they believed made the 3 so successful.

The Mazda 3 was one of the later vehicles I got to drive, I was very curious about how this one would drive. I have driven the Protege and while I liked it, the Protege suffered from not having the performance I thought would make it great. I really wanted to see whether the Mazda 3 was different for better or for worse.


Performance: The Mazda 3 we have in fleet only have the 2.0L which produces 148 hp and 135 lb.ft of torque. Much to my surprise this engine actually was more than adequate to move the Mazda 3 despite its slightly lower torque rating. Its actually less noisier than the Mazda 6's 4-cylinder engine making it a good engine even for highway usage. Acceleration numbers for the Mazda 3's bigger 2.3L engine is an impressive 7.4 seconds for the 2.0L I drive the estimate is somewhere between 8.5-9 seconds to reach 100 km/h from 0. Not bad. If I had to pick out a flaw, its not as fuel efficient as a Civic or Corolla.

My Score: 8/10 - Despite being the base engine its reasonably smooth, decent power and is a non-issue for a regular motorist.

Handling: I mentioned the C1 platform's capabilities in the Focus review. The Mazda 3 was the car that showed me how great this platform is and confused me why the 2008+ Ford Focus didn't use it. The Mazda's ability to take corners is one of the best among the compacts and subcompact cars. I've never had an issue with ride comfort either making it better than a Honda. Lastly steering feel...incredible, I instantly fell in love with how the car felt when making even a simple turn. The Celica GT I reviewed a while back is the best handling FWD I've driven, the Mazda 3 felt it had about 95% of the Celica's cornering ability. I actually think the steering feel in the 3 is better than the Celica's, the Celica had a tougher wheel which I do like but the 3 has a lighter one that still gave the same great feeling. Fantastic.

My Score: 10/10 - Want a very fun, conventional car? The Mazda 3 is so far ahead of the competition here.


Interior: Like I mentioned in the Mazda 6 review, Mazda seems to enjoy having black sporty interiors. I guess its to go with the image of their cars being more sporty than others. The Mazda 3 doesn't try to hide the fact most of the interior is plastic, fortunately its decent plastic. Interior room is also pretty decent although the rear isn't as spacious as other vehicles and the trunk is a bit small. The problem with the Mazda 3's interior...its very difficult to clean. The carpets are the biggest obstacle making it frustrating if you want the interior clean when the vacuum is not cleaning the way it should. The Mazda 3 is built in Japan, I've not seen a build quality flaw in the Mazda 3 and thus I considered them well built.

My Score: 7/10 - Mostly plastic, few colour choices and difficult to clean but functional and styled alright, built very well.

Styling: The Mazda 3 does have a bit of a generic look to it but like I would say for a Subaru Legacy not in a bad way. Its a regular car but it just looks its part, its not very boring and its different than your typical Toyota or Honda. The headlights show a tad bit of aggression while the tail lights flow with the round body very well. I just can't complain, while not the most beautiful car certainly a pretty good looking one.

My Score: 8/10 - Good looks, it just doesn't go far enough to reach absolute beauty

Value for money: Having a sedan and hatchback option really do put the Mazda in a good position. For a car this well built and this good to drive and its also not expensive to run...its hard to argue against its value. A Mazda badge also helps since Mazda is still trying to make a name for itself and doesn't overcharge like Toyota or Honda do. If the regular 3 is not sporty enough, Mazda offers the Mazdaspeed 3 which is much better than anything Honda or Toyota offer. A reasonably priced family car that's rewarding to drive and due to popularity won't depreciate quickly...its one of the best deals out there.

My Score: 10/10 - Worthy every single penny regardless of what options you choose, its the new industry standard

Overall: 43/50 - One of the best family vehicles I've ever come across.

2007-2009 Dodge Caliber SXT

After reviewing two of the Caliber's Jeep relatives I thought I might as well finally throw the Caliber in the mix despite it being one of the cars I still drive. As you can probably see from the Compass and Patriot reviews you can expect a similar score for the Caliber.


Introduction: The Caliber was introduced in 2006 as Dodge's replacement for the Dodge Neon in the 2007 model year. Unlike the Neon the Caliber is only available as a hatchback and its the first Chrysler to use the GEMA engines where Chrysler, Mitsubishi and Hyundai cooperated to design. The Caliber also is one of the earliest Chryslers to use a CVT transmission.

Like all Chrysler models I was not very interested in the Caliber and at this point I expected the worst. What I didn't expect were the colours the Caliber came in...there's an bottle tan orange which is pretty hideous.


Performance: The Caliber SXT comes with the 2.0L GEMA 4-cylinder engine which produces 158 hp and 141 lb.ft of torque. All SXTs come with a CVT transmission to be paired with this engine. There is also a selection of the 1.8L GEMA engine which is only paired with the manual transmission and the bigger 2.4 GEMA engine which was mentioned in the Patriot and Compass reviews. Bottom line, this 2.0L GEMA engine is just as terrible and is certainly worse than the 2.4L due to how lethargic the car accelerates. This is also the worst CVT I've encountered, its not a fuel efficient power train and its unable to get the best gear ratios when you want to go faster. Nissan is superior it seems when it comes to making a proper CVT than Chrysler is. There is no exact acceleration times the 1.8L with the manual was clocked at 9.7 seconds for its 0-100 km/h time. The 2.0L with its stupid transmission feels more than 10 seconds despite the extra torque. The most annoying thing about accelerating the Caliber with the CVT is...from 0-5000 rpm you get lots of noise but no real movement its the 5000-6000 range where the car actually wakes up.

My Score: 1/10 - Terrible engine, very noisy, very slow

Handling: Here's another area of expected failure and the Caliber doesn't disappoint. The base Calibers are roughly 3000 lbs which is very heavy for a car of this size, as a result it has a more difficult time taking corners. The suspension Dodge fitted to this car is neither comfortable nor very good at taking corners. Dodge has done a poor job with the steering feel, while its hydraulic its way too over boosted and as such always feels numb. For a car that's designed for the city since its too slow and noisy for highway driving, the Caliber is a bit of a disaster.

My Score: 1/10 - A heavy car, with numb steering and an awful suspension...there's no way such a combination is good.


Interior: The interior plastics in the Caliber are identical to the Compass and the Patriot. Very cheap plastic material, absolutely unattractive in every way possible. Most Calibers use black plastic and it doesn't seem to hide how hideous the vehicle is to be inside. The seat is decent but is still not comfortable. If you got a base Caliber its even worse, you get roll up windows and because Dodge intended you to buy the power options Dodge didn't make it easy to get at the door locks for the rear doors. The Caliber is however spacious for its size and as a hatch the rear can hold quite a few items. Keep in mind the plastic board covering your spare wheel is so cheap in quality it'll scratch instantly you put something solid there. The Caliber is built in the US and unfortunately is not built very well, panel gaps and loose trim are common issues.

My Score: 2/10 - Low quality materials, not comfortable, not built very well but spacious

Styling: Dodge wanted to make a car that appeared somewhat like an SUV but wasn't. This just makes the proportions of the Caliber look very odd. The vehicle is very chunky in portions that make it ungainly and the truck-like grille again gives you the impression its big...until you see the roof where the car looks flattened. The cheap plastic roof spoiler contains your 3rd brake light meaning its not an option to lose it sadly.

My Score: 2/10 - Doesn't look very good, ugly proportions particularly

Value for the money: If space is really what you want from a car, the Caliber might actually not be a horrible buy. Then again why not just pay that bit extra for a then Mazda 6 wagon which is superior to this car. Everything else the Caliber does is horrible, its less fuel efficient than its ancestors from the K-car(the Aries and Reliant) and the predecessor Neon. The Neon was also faster due to not having the blocky body. Calibers are not reliable either ensuring a loss here to the Japanese cars. They're not great to drive also ensuring a loss to VW. Lastly while its built in America...it still confuses me why you would buy this vehicle when there are better American choices like the Focus and the Cobalt.

My Score: 2/10 - If you need a cheap spacious hatch, maybe but on all other levels this car is pretty awful.

Overall: 8/50 - Another hopeless car from Chrysler.

2009 Toyota Corolla update

Well I mentioned about how dangerous driving the Corolla was in the winter. Guess what I've been proven entirely correct by Toyota USA and that it wasn't just the vehicles I was driving. Read the handling section to see what I wrote about the Corolla's scary winter handling. This is why I rave on about how the car feels, without it means you lost that connection between the car and the road. You'll have less information as a driver about what's going on with your car and what your next actions should be. I'm still disappointed that Toyota has even got to this point.

The sad thing is, Toyota in 2008 was a company flush with cash and they make such a weak product. I know Chrysler makes some horrible cars but they're bleeding cash on a daily basis unlike Toyota who back then was raking in the dough. It seems being the #1 automaker does bad things to the company that reaches it, GM will never be the same again and I doubt will return to that position again. Toyota the current leader on the sales board has lost the quality that was instrumental from making it a small car company into a auto giant.

2008-2009 Jeep Patriot

Here's another Jeep...this one isn't that much different from the Compass.


Introduction: The Jeep Patriot is another cross-over built by Chrysler like the Compass used the same Caliber platform. Introduced in 2007 at the same time as the Caliber and its sibling the Compass. Unlike the Compass the Patriot does have the Trail rated badge meaning its supposed to satisfy Chrysler's testing criteria for off-roading.

Yeah the Jeep Patriot isn't really much different from the Compass other than supposedly being able to go off-road and if it fails...that's Chrysler's problem.


Performance: The Patriot uses the exact same engine and exact same transmission as the Compass. The same 2.4L 4-cylinder engine that produces 173 hp and 165 lb.ft of torque. Its still gutless and unpleasant. The Patriot's 0-100 km/h time is about 9.5 seconds marginally slower than the Compass.

My Score: 2/10 - Engine is slow, noisy and not very fuel efficient.

Handling: The Patriot drives so similar to the Compass despite its supposed ability to go off-road. It still handles pretty badly and the steering is just as numb. However as a vehicle that can go off-road the suspension is more understandably not all that comfortable.

My Score: 3/10 - Same pathetic handling ability, the good news...the suspension is justifiably harder for off-roading.


Interior: The 2009s were given an interior update...you know the interior of the previous 2007 models were very bad when Chrysler had to update them so soon. That said its still a horrible interior. Much of the disgusting plastic that's in every Chrysler is still present. It really didn't improve all that much frankly. Unlike Hyundai, Chrysler even when they know their mistake can't seem to correct it...probably because they spent all the money on the 2009 Ram.

My Score: 2/10 - Its still terrible, they clearly didn't try hard enough.

Styling: The Patriot is a little bit better than the Compass with styling but they ruin it with the cheap looking plastic bits on the bumpers. While it does look more like an SUV compared to the Compass which is a blob with a Jeep grille, its still not pretty and doesn't look like its an off-roader. Once again it takes the Wrangler's styling in an attempt to pretend its something its not.

My Score: 3/10 - Better than the Compass thanks to it looking like an SUV, not very creative though.

Value for Money: Well the Patriot...is cheaper than the Compass. It makes no sense, I couldn't believe the Compass goes for more than the Patriot when the Patriot does a little bit more and had an ounce more effort put into it. Its the least expensive 4WD vehicle out there which does count for something when its supposed to have some off-roading capabilities so its not a complete waste like the Compass.

My Score: 4/10 - It does more than a Compass, and its the cheapest 4WD SUV designed to go off-road.

Overall: 14/50 - Its still a horrible SUV but unlike the Compass its not a total crock it at least does a slight bit more for frankly less money. The name however is pretty stupid, you'd probably be a better American patriot if you bought a good American product.

2007-2008 Jeep Compass

I technically haven't driven a Jeep Compass in a year but its so similar to a certain car that I technically have always driven the thing.


Introduction: The Jeep Compass was introduced in 2007 as one of Jeep's most affordable models. Its based off the Dodge Caliber introduced in the same year. This is the very first Jeep to not have the "Trail rated" badge indicating its not designed to go off-road as every other Jeep had before.

Yeah my intro for this car is pretty pathetic...but that's as much as I can say about a re-badged Caliber. This is I believe the 2nd car I've driven from work. Judging from how little I have to say in the introduction...you know what to expect.


Performance: The Jeep Compass comes with a 2.4L 4-cylinder engine that produces 173 hp and 165 lb.ft of torque. The same engine used in the base Sebring and Avenger. In a heavy vehicle like this you know what my grade is going to be. The only difference is the Compass uses a CVT. Its 0-100 km/h time is 9.2 seconds, far from impressive.

My Score: 2/10 - Engine is slow, noisy and not very fuel efficient.

Handling: The Compass uses Caliber suspension and as a result its not very good. The handling is pretty poor with lots of roll thanks to the bigger body. The steering is as usual numb with little feel or feedback. Its a bad combination to have a big heavy vehicle with poor handling and numb steering. Its not even comfortable riding over bumps which makes it all the more worse.

My Score: 2/10 - Poor cornering ability, numb steering and not comfortable.


Interior: The interior is virtually identical to the Caliber. Very very cheap materials, an unattractive dashboard, not built very well and worst of all not all that much roomier than a Caliber despite a bigger body. As a crossover SUV its a very poor job.

My Score: 1/10 - No more room than the awful car it was based off of.

Styling: This is where the Compass is different from the Caliber but just by looking at the Compass you know they didn't even bother. A round plasticky looking Wrangler is really what the styling says and unfortunately its a lesser vehicle than the Wrangler.

My Score: 2/10 - It shows its cheap looking while attempting to look like something it clearly isn't.

Value for the Money: The Compass is an awful value for the money especially when you compare it to the other Dodges and its Jeep sibling the Patriot. For the extra thousand you spend on a Compass all you get is a slightly bigger engine which isn't all that great. This is a big crock and ruins the Jeep name, Jeep enthusiasts must be furious about this awful re-badge.

My Score: 0/10 - A re-badge that costs more for no extra value, a pointless vehicle

Overall: 7/50 - What was Chrysler thinking, surely people weren't dumb enough to buy this were they?

2008 Toyota Prius

Our branch's only Toyota Prius which we got from Brampton is scheduled to be sold off. We're unlikely to get another one so I'll review it while its still fresh in my mind. I will not inject politics into this review.


Introduction: The Toyota Prius is the first production gasoline/electric hybrid vehicle. The idea of hybrid powertrain is not a new one since many locomotives use a diesel/electric hybrid system before the development of the Prius. The Prius was first introduced in 1997 specifically for the Japanese market. It would be updated and later released to markets outside of Japan in 2001. Using a 1.5L 4-cylinder engine paired with a Ni-MH battery the idea is to use the electric motor to operate the vehicle while the gasoline engine and kinetic braking recharge the battery. The Prius had a competitor by the name of the Honda Insight, a 2-door hybrid coupe that did produce better fuel economy numbers. The problem however was the Prius was a more practical vehicle and had less controversial styling. The Insight would be retired. The Prius would undergo a redesign in 2004, a much larger vehicle than the older model but it was only available as a hatchback. In 2009 once again the newly redesigned Prius this time to once again combat the newly designed 2010 Honda Insight. Regardless of what your beliefs about the Prius, it proved that green car marketing is a profitable business.

When I saw this car myself and the fact we were going to acquire one, I was eager to see if the hybrids are much more different to drive than a regular car. The Prius we got had an unattractive brown colour and was rather aged but its a Toyota so it shouldn't matter.


Performance: Well this was a certainly more different experience than any car I've driven. The electric motor shows its ability to accelerate the car rather quickly for city type driving. Unlike a regular car, the electric motors make no noise at all so while you know your moving...you just don't feel it. Keep in mind the gasoline motor starts to kick in once you start going faster so all the sudden you will hear noise once you approach highway speeds. The gasoline motor is not very impressive and the smooth quickness from the electric motor starts to slow down quickly. The Prius gets an acceleration time of 0-100 km/h in 10.5 seconds. You sort of expect this for a vehicle that produces a net horsepower of 110hp.

My Score: 4/10 - The electric motor moves the car well, the gasoline engine unfortunately shows the lack of power however.

Handling: While the aerodynamics on the Prius are excellent, the handling of the Prius falls short in a few areas. First things first, the tires. Normally I don't bother with tires but the Prius in order to get the maximum fuel economy out of the car you have to stick with the tires given. The problem is in order to get the best fuel economy they lack grip and without grip the handling will be poor. The electronic power steering is very numb while not nearly as numb as a 2009 Corolla's there just isn't any feel to it. Lastly the electronic overlords like the traction control interfere frequently when you take corners a bit more aggressively. If you attempt to push the Prius you'll see a car trying to turn with screaming tires but still going mostly straight due to major understeer.

My Score: 2/10 - Bad tires, lack of steering feel and aggressive electronic overlords.


Interior: The Prius' interior is once again another different experience. The materials are of decent quality except the gear lever which is really small and flimsy. The dashboard is actually in the center with digital read outs instead of traditional analog gauges. What strikes me as odd is the digital readouts are the same colour as my Cressida's digital dash a design 24 years ago while failing to take notice of the Toyota Soarer's(Lexus SC300/400) cleaner modern dash. Regardless I like that part since I do believe we live in the 21st century and cars should reflect that. The car also has a push button start and also a push button park. The one item that gets most people's attention is the video screen in the center...I didn't like it very much. Some people love to see how good their fuel economy is or whether the battery is charging, etc. I just hope they don't do this while driving because you really have to take your eye off the road to do so. A few other traditional functions are taken away because of the screen. Your climate control buttons are on the steering wheel...but for exact adjustments you'll have to go back to that screen which annoyed me. The rear spoiler...is a bit of a spoiler since it decreases your rear visibility more so than regular spoilers, the view is split with the spoiler in the median of your rear windscreen. The Prius is made in Japan, as I've seen with all Japanese cars made in Japan I haven't seen build quality faults.

My Score: 6/10 - A modern dash, spacious, but a gimmicky screen and a dumb spoiler.

Styling: The Prius' styling is mostly done by engineers. Without this smooth shape the car is less likely to achieve its impressive aerodynamics. The problem is, its not a thing of beauty. I don't really understand the gimmicky tail lights and the front doesn't have very much expression. The Prius is however unique in the way it looks so I can't really fault it badly here.

My Score: 5/10 - Strange but unique

Value of Money: This is a very very tricky one. The Prius has a very high MSRP for a vehicle in the same class as a Corolla. Those cars can be had with less than $20,000 while the Prius will often strike $30,000 all things included. The government rebates do not lessen this burden enough, they're actually better used for the subcompacts like the Toyota Yaris. The high initial cost is really the big factor, will you drive the car enough to make enough return through savings from the pump? The prices at the pump determine some of this, if they are lower it will take much longer to recoup the costs if they're very high it will be much sooner. There are alternatives, subcompacts get great fuel economy have low initial costs and low maintenance costs. Newer diesels provide better fuel economy and have excellent reliability(engine-wise) so long as your near stations that provide diesel fuel. As I mentioned in the performance section, the Prius is not great for the highway and since it needs the gasoline motor for those speeds you'll achieve much poorer fuel economy results while powerful V6 vehicles get significantly better mileage for that sort of driving.

My Score: 6/10 - The only choice if you drive in the city a lot and often idle a lot with no diesel station nearby.

Overall: 23/50 - This car is tailored to specific needs, it most likely won't fit most people's needs.