MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Mazda » 3 » 2010

Mazda 3 MOT Results

Registered in 2010
64.9% pass rate
from 9,479 tests in 2021
(6.3% better than other 2010 cars)
Pass rate by mileage
More MoT Results
Failure rates by item

Here you can drill down into the failure rates for each item on the test. We've also compared the rates to the average results for 2010 cars and highlighted areas where the Mazda 3 is unusually good or bad.

  • 14% fail on Suspension
    • 9.3% fail on Suspension arms (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 8.6% fail on Ball joint (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.49% fail on Pins and bushes (71% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.32% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.032% fail on Suspension arm (76% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.2% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.5% fail on Linkage ball joints (34% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.58% fail on Ball joint (77% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.55% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover (53% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.18% fail on Linkage
      • 0.042% fail on Anti-roll bar
      • 0.042% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.021% fail on Linkage pins and bushes (82% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.021% fail on Linkage attachment bracket and mounting
    • 1.3% fail on Springs (75% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.3% fail on Coil springs (75% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.3% fail on Coil spring (75% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.3% fail on Shock absorbers (57% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.45% fail on Other suspension component (96% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.43% fail on Ball joint (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.011% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.011% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.011% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.19% fail on Wheel bearings (66% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.074% fail on Sub-frames (66% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.042% fail on Ball joint (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.032% fail on Sub-frame
    • 0.042% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.021% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.011% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.011% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.011% fail on Axles
      • 0.011% fail on Swivel pins and bushes
    • 0.011% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.011% fail on Macpherson strut
  • 8.7% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (26% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.0% fail on Stop lamp
    • 2.3% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 2.0% fail on Headlamp aim (33% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Headlamp aim (33% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 1.7% fail on Headlamps (44% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.6% fail on Headlamp (42% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.032% fail on Headlamp levelling device (80% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.021% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
    • 0.38% fail on Rear reflectors (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.23% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.23% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.14% fail on Direction indicators (93% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on Flashing type (93% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.074% fail on Side repeaters (90% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.042% fail on Individual direction indicators (97% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.021% fail on All direction indicators (79% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.084% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (85% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.084% fail on Rear fog lamp (85% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.084% fail on Rear fog lamp (85% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.053% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.042% fail on Position lamp
      • 0.011% fail on All position lamps
    • 0.053% fail on Electrical equipment (84% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.042% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.011% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.011% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.011% fail on Switch
  • 7.9% fail on Brakes
    • 3.5% fail on Mechanical brake components (20% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.0% fail on Brake linings and pads (45% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 3.0% fail on Brake pads (45% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.011% fail on Brake linings
      • 0.88% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 0.88% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.063% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.042% fail on Linkage (9 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.021% fail on Lever
        • 0.011% fail on Cable
    • 2.9% fail on Brake performance (28% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.6% fail on Service brake performance
        • 1.6% fail on Rbt
          • 1.5% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.30% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.011% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.011% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.93% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (48% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.92% fail on Rbt (sp) (46% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.011% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 0.37% fail on Parking brake performance (53% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.36% fail on Rbt (53% better than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.31% fail on Parking brake performance (55% better than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.053% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
        • 0.011% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.011% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
      • 0.34% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp) (40% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.33% fail on Rbt (sp) (40% better than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.19% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.18% fail on Service brake imbalance (59% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.011% fail on Plate brake tester (sp)
          • 0.011% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 0.19% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 1.5% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC (160% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Anti-lock braking system (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.71% fail on Electronic stability control (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.33% fail on Flexible brake hoses (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.25% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.17% fail on Hand lever
      • 0.084% fail on Pedal
    • 0.25% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.25% fail on Lever
    • 0.18% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.18% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers (97% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.095% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.032% fail on Reservoirs
      • 0.032% fail on Brake fluid
      • 0.021% fail on Valves
      • 0.011% fail on Master cylinder
    • 0.042% fail on Rigid brake pipes (94% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.042% fail on Other components and prescribed areas
      • 0.042% fail on Other components (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.011% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 0.011% fail on Leaks
  • 6.0% fail on Tyres
    • 3.4% fail on Tread depth
    • 2.8% fail on Condition
    • 0.18% fail on Size/type
  • 5.2% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (50% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 5.0% fail on Exhaust emissions (51% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.9% fail on Spark ignition (90% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 3.1% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.65% fail on Catalyst emissions (30% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.39% fail on Emissions not tested
        • 0.021% fail on Non catalyst emissions
      • 1.1% fail on Compression ignition
        • 0.72% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (50% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.24% fail on On or after 01/07/2008 (61% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.084% fail on Emission control equipment (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.063% fail on Particulate filter (8 times worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.021% fail on Other emission control equipment
        • 0.084% fail on Emissions not tested
        • 0.021% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Non turbo
        • 0.011% fail on Pre 01/01/1980 visual
        • 0.011% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Turbo
        • 0.011% fail on On or after 01/01/2014
    • 0.28% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.26% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.021% fail on Other leaks
    • 0.053% fail on Noise suppression
      • 0.042% fail on Undertray
      • 0.011% fail on Sound deadening material
  • 4.7% fail on Visibility (12% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.6% fail on Wipers
    • 2.2% fail on Washers (20% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.084% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.084% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.063% fail on View to rear
      • 0.063% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.032% fail on Bonnet (77% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.011% fail on Driver's view
  • 1.8% fail on Body, chassis, structure (54% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.98% fail on Exhaust system (42% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.46% fail on Transmission (71% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.43% fail on Drive shafts (71% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.42% fail on Joints (72% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.011% fail on Flexible couplings
      • 0.032% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.032% fail on Joints
    • 0.074% fail on Undertray
    • 0.063% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.063% fail on Seats
      • 0.053% fail on Driver's seat
      • 0.011% fail on Passenger's seat
    • 0.053% fail on Body
      • 0.042% fail on Other body component
      • 0.011% fail on Panel
    • 0.042% fail on Doors (78% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.021% fail on Front passenger's door
        • 0.021% fail on Door condition
      • 0.011% fail on Driver's door
        • 0.011% fail on Door condition
      • 0.011% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.011% fail on Door condition
    • 0.032% fail on Fuel system (86% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.021% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device (85% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.011% fail on Tank
    • 0.032% fail on Towbar (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.032% fail on Towbar condition (35 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.032% fail on Engine mounting
      • 0.021% fail on Engine mounting condition
      • 0.011% fail on Bracket
    • 0.011% fail on Spare wheel
      • 0.011% fail on Spare wheel condition
  • 0.77% fail on Steering (68% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.49% fail on Steering linkage components (75% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.33% fail on Track rod end (82% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.042% fail on Locking devices
      • 0.011% fail on Drag link end
      • 0.011% fail on Other components
        • 0.011% fail on Steering linkage
    • 0.15% fail on Steering gear (51% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.15% fail on Steering rack (49% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.14% fail on Power steering
      • 0.13% fail on Operation (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.011% fail on Pipes and hoses
      • 0.011% fail on Other components
    • 0.032% fail on Steering play
      • 0.032% fail on Steering rack
  • 0.41% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.37% fail on Attachment
    • 0.032% fail on Condition (73% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.011% fail on Hubs
  • 0.28% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.27% fail on Registration plates
    • 0.011% fail on Vehicle Identification Number
  • 0.16% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (83% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.13% fail on Seat belts (71% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.095% fail on Condition (73% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.021% fail on Requirements
      • 0.011% fail on Attachment
    • 0.032% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp (93% better than other 2010 cars)
Read the Honest John Review

  • Mazda 3 (2009 - 2013)
    Stylish looks. Excellent steering and handling. Good quality interior. Impressive 2.2-litre chain cam diesel engine. Facelifted for 2012 and even better.

    Search Good Garages