Mazda 5 MOT Results

Registered in 2012
69.0% pass rate
from 912 tests in 2020
(18% worse than other 2012 cars)
Pass rate by mileage
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 2012 cars and highlighted areas where the Mazda 5 is unusually good or bad.

  • 10% fail on Suspension (55% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 5.7% fail on Suspension arms (180% worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 4.1% fail on Pins and bushes (3 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 1.9% fail on Ball joint (95% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 3.0% fail on Shock absorbers (3 times worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 2.6% fail on Anti-roll bars (180% worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 1.5% fail on Linkage ball joints (2 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.66% fail on Linkage (11 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.22% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.11% fail on Anti-roll bar
      • 0.11% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.11% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
    • 0.11% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.11% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.11% fail on Ball joint
  • 8.2% fail on Tyres (46% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 4.3% fail on Tread depth
    • 4.1% fail on Condition (54% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.11% fail on Size/type
    • 0.11% fail on Tyre pressure monitoring system
  • 8.1% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 2.3% fail on Stop lamp
    • 1.9% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 1.9% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 1.8% fail on Reversing lamps (10 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Reversing lamps (10 times worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 1.5% fail on Position lamps
      • 1.2% fail on Position lamp
      • 0.33% fail on All position lamps (10 times worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.66% fail on Headlamps (68% better than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.55% fail on Headlamp (72% better than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Headlamp levelling device
    • 0.22% fail on Registration plate lamp(s) (84% better than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.22% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.11% fail on Direction indicators
      • 0.11% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.11% fail on Side repeaters
    • 0.11% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 0.11% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.11% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.11% fail on Switch
    • 0.11% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.11% fail on Trailer electrical socket
  • 7.0% fail on Visibility (68% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 5.0% fail on Wipers (120% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 1.6% fail on Washers
    • 0.33% fail on View to rear
      • 0.33% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.22% fail on Driver's view
  • 6.1% fail on Brakes
    • 4.6% fail on Mechanical brake components (52% worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 4.1% fail on Brake linings and pads (63% worse than other 2012 cars)
        • 4.1% fail on Brake pads (64% worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.99% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 0.99% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.22% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.11% fail on Lever
        • 0.11% fail on Linkage
    • 1.4% fail on Brake performance
      • 0.99% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.88% fail on Rbt
          • 0.66% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.22% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.11% fail on Decelerometer
          • 0.11% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.33% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 0.33% fail on Rbt (sp)
      • 0.22% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.22% fail on Rbt
          • 0.22% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 0.11% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.11% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.11% fail on Service brake imbalance
    • 0.22% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.22% fail on Lever
    • 0.11% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.11% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers
    • 0.11% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.11% fail on Electronic stability control
  • 1.5% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 0.77% fail on Transmission
      • 0.77% fail on Drive shafts
        • 0.66% fail on Joints
        • 0.11% fail on Flexible couplings
    • 0.44% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.22% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.22% fail on Tank (18 times worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.11% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.11% fail on Body
      • 0.11% fail on Panel
    • 0.11% fail on Undertray
  • 1.2% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 0.99% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 0.66% fail on Compression ignition
        • 0.44% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
        • 0.11% fail on On or after 01/01/2014
        • 0.11% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
      • 0.33% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.22% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.11% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
    • 0.11% fail on Noise suppression
      • 0.11% fail on Sound deadening material
    • 0.11% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.11% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 0.44% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.44% fail on Attachment
  • 0.22% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.22% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.22% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.22% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.22% fail on Condition
  • 0.11% fail on Steering
    • 0.11% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 0.11% fail on Track rod end
Read the Honest John Review

  • Mazda 5 (2010 - 2015)
    Family friendly seven seater. Sport has remote electric sliding side doors. Economical and light new 1.6 diesel. Compliant suspension astonishingly good on poor road surfaces.

    Search Good Garages