MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Mazda » 5 » 2009

Mazda 5 MOT Results

Registered in 2009
51.8% pass rate
from 1,984 tests in 2021
(24% worse than other 2009 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 2009 cars and highlighted areas where the Mazda 5 is unusually good or bad.

  • 24% fail on Suspension (63% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 14% fail on Suspension arms (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 7.2% fail on Ball joint (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 7.1% fail on Pins and bushes (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.81% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.15% fail on Suspension arm
    • 8.2% fail on Anti-roll bars (110% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 4.3% fail on Linkage ball joints (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 1.0% fail on Ball joint (150% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.66% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.45% fail on Pins and bushes (4 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.45% fail on Linkage
      • 0.15% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
      • 0.050% fail on Anti-roll bar
    • 4.1% fail on Springs (29% better than other 2009 cars)
      • 4.1% fail on Coil springs (29% better than other 2009 cars)
        • 4.1% fail on Coil spring (28% better than other 2009 cars)
    • 2.2% fail on Shock absorbers (150% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.81% fail on Other suspension component (190% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.60% fail on Ball joint (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.15% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.050% fail on Other suspension component
    • 0.50% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.25% fail on Sub-frame
      • 0.15% fail on Sub-frame mounting prescribed areas
      • 0.050% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.050% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.050% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.25% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.20% fail on Axles
      • 0.20% fail on Swivel pins and bushes
    • 0.15% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.10% fail on Ball joint (4 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.050% fail on Suspension rod
    • 0.15% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 0.10% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.050% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.050% fail on Pins and bushes
  • 14% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 5.7% fail on Headlamps (76% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 5.5% fail on Headlamp (81% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.15% fail on Headlamp levelling device
      • 0.050% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
    • 3.6% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 2.9% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.81% fail on Headlamp aim not tested (140% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 2.1% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 2.0% fail on Stop lamp (41% better than other 2009 cars)
    • 1.5% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 1.5% fail on Rear fog lamp (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 1.5% fail on Rear fog lamp (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 1.1% fail on Hazard warning (17 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 1.1% fail on Switch (17 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.30% fail on Rear reflectors (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.20% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.20% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.15% fail on Direction indicators (92% better than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.15% fail on Flashing type (92% better than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.10% fail on Side repeaters (86% better than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.050% fail on Individual direction indicators
    • 0.050% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.050% fail on Reversing lamps
  • 10% fail on Brakes
    • 5.7% fail on Mechanical brake components (92% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 4.8% fail on Brake linings and pads (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 4.7% fail on Brake pads (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.050% fail on Brake linings
      • 1.5% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.5% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.050% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.050% fail on Lever
    • 3.2% fail on Brake performance (32% better than other 2009 cars)
      • 1.5% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 1.5% fail on Rbt (sp)
      • 1.5% fail on Service brake performance (40% better than other 2009 cars)
        • 1.5% fail on Rbt (39% better than other 2009 cars)
          • 1.3% fail on Service brake performance (40% better than other 2009 cars)
          • 0.25% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 0.76% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.71% fail on Rbt
          • 0.66% fail on Parking brake performance
          • 0.050% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
        • 0.050% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.050% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 0.30% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.30% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.20% fail on Service brake imbalance
          • 0.15% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.20% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 0.96% fail on Hydraulic systems (7 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.55% fail on Brake fluid (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.30% fail on Master cylinder (60 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.15% fail on Valves (20 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.050% fail on Reservoirs
    • 0.55% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.45% fail on Pedal (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.10% fail on Hand lever
    • 0.45% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.45% fail on Lever
    • 0.45% fail on Flexible brake hoses (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.40% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.25% fail on Anti-lock braking system
      • 0.20% fail on Electronic stability control
    • 0.35% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.35% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.25% fail on Rigid brake pipes (74% better than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.050% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 0.050% fail on Servos
  • 9.6% fail on Body, chassis, structure (100% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 5.3% fail on Exhaust system (170% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 4.3% fail on Transmission (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 4.2% fail on Drive shafts (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 4.1% fail on Joints (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.050% fail on Drive shaft
        • 0.050% fail on Flexible couplings
      • 0.15% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.15% fail on Joints
    • 0.50% fail on Bumpers (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.25% fail on Doors
      • 0.20% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.20% fail on Door condition
      • 0.050% fail on Front passenger's door
        • 0.050% fail on Door condition
    • 0.15% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.10% fail on Tank
      • 0.050% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
    • 0.15% fail on Body
      • 0.10% fail on Other body component
      • 0.050% fail on Panel
    • 0.10% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 0.10% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 0.10% fail on Seats
      • 0.050% fail on Driver's seat
      • 0.050% fail on Passenger's seat
  • 9.6% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (120% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 9.3% fail on Exhaust emissions (120% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 8.1% fail on Spark ignition (200% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 5.4% fail on Catalyst emissions (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 2.0% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (63% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 1.7% fail on Emissions not tested (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.10% fail on Non catalyst emissions
      • 1.5% fail on Compression ignition
        • 0.50% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
        • 0.45% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.40% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Non turbo (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.15% fail on Emission control equipment (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
          • 0.15% fail on Particulate filter (20 times worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.15% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.30% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.25% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.050% fail on Hydraulic fluid leaks
    • 0.050% fail on Noise suppression
      • 0.050% fail on Undertray
  • 8.3% fail on Tyres (33% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 4.4% fail on Tread depth
    • 4.1% fail on Condition (39% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.45% fail on Size/type
  • 6.5% fail on Visibility
    • 4.1% fail on Wipers (51% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 2.5% fail on Washers
    • 0.050% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.050% fail on Windscreen
  • 2.0% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (84% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 1.4% fail on Seat belts (180% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.81% fail on Condition (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.30% fail on Requirements (13 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.050% fail on Attachment
    • 0.66% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 1.1% fail on Steering (53% better than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.86% fail on Steering linkage components (55% better than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.86% fail on Track rod end (52% better than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.20% fail on Steering gear
      • 0.20% fail on Steering rack
    • 0.050% fail on Power steering
      • 0.050% fail on Operation
  • 0.76% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.76% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.66% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.66% fail on Attachment
Read the Honest John Review

  • Mazda 5 (2005 - 2010)
    Sliding side doors, can carry seven people in comfort, well styled, rearmost seats fold flat into the floor, five-star crash test rating.

    Search Good Garages