MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Mitsubishi » ASX » 2010

Mitsubishi ASX MOT Results

Registered in 2010
66.6% pass rate
from 1,908 tests in 2021
(11% 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 Mitsubishi ASX is unusually good or bad.

  • 10% fail on Brakes (29% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.9% fail on Mechanical brake components (66% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.4% fail on Brake linings and pads (61% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 3.4% fail on Brake pads (63% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.2% fail on Brake discs and drums (95% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 2.2% fail on Brake discs (96% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.5% fail on Brake performance
      • 2.4% fail on Service brake performance
        • 2.4% fail on Rbt
          • 1.9% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.68% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 0.52% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (71% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.47% fail on Rbt (sp) (72% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.052% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 0.42% fail on Brake performance not tested (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.37% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.37% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.26% fail on Service brake imbalance
          • 0.16% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.052% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.052% fail on Rbt
          • 0.052% fail on Parking brake performance
    • 2.7% fail on Rigid brake pipes (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.89% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.89% fail on Anti-lock braking system (90% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.58% fail on Electronic stability control (170% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.10% fail on Air and vacuum systems (12 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.10% fail on Servos (25 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.10% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.10% fail on Lever
    • 0.052% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.052% fail on Hand lever
    • 0.052% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.052% fail on Valves
    • 0.052% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.052% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.052% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers
  • 9.1% fail on Suspension (31% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.9% fail on Anti-roll bars (40% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.1% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover (81% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Pins and bushes (18 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.1% fail on Linkage ball joints
      • 0.68% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.31% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.16% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
    • 1.9% fail on Shock absorbers (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.6% fail on Suspension arms (62% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.73% fail on Pins and bushes (56% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.68% fail on Ball joint (67% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.16% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.052% fail on Suspension arm
    • 1.3% fail on Springs (76% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.3% fail on Coil springs (76% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.3% fail on Coil spring (76% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.21% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.21% fail on Sub-frame
    • 0.10% fail on Wheel bearings (81% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.10% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.10% fail on Ball joint (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.052% fail on Axles
      • 0.052% fail on Axle
    • 0.052% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.052% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.052% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
  • 6.2% fail on Body, chassis, structure (57% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 5.3% fail on Exhaust system (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.21% fail on Transmission (87% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.21% fail on Drive shafts (86% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.21% fail on Joints (86% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.16% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.10% fail on Pipe
      • 0.052% fail on Tank
    • 0.16% fail on Engine mounting (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.16% fail on Engine mounting condition (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.16% fail on Body
      • 0.10% fail on Other body component
      • 0.052% fail on Panel
    • 0.10% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 0.10% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 0.052% fail on Doors
      • 0.052% fail on Front passenger's door
        • 0.052% fail on Door condition
    • 0.052% fail on Boot lid
      • 0.052% fail on Boot lid condition
    • 0.052% fail on Undertray
  • 5.4% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (55% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.0% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 1.8% fail on Headlamp aim (38% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 1.00% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 1.00% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 1.00% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.58% fail on Headlamps (81% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.58% fail on Headlamp (80% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.21% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.16% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.052% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.16% fail on Stop lamp (95% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.16% fail on Direction indicators (92% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.16% fail on Flashing type (92% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.10% fail on Individual direction indicators (92% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.052% fail on All direction indicators
    • 0.052% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.052% fail on Reversing lamps
  • 5.3% fail on Visibility
    • 3.3% fail on Wipers
    • 2.1% fail on Washers
    • 0.10% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.10% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.052% fail on View to rear
      • 0.052% fail on Mirrors
  • 4.0% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 3.9% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 2.3% fail on Compression ignition (83% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.3% fail on Emissions not tested (9 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.73% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.37% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
        • 0.10% fail on On or after 01/01/2014 (8 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.052% fail on Emission control equipment
          • 0.052% fail on Catalytic converter
        • 0.052% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Non turbo
      • 1.6% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.68% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.47% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.47% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.10% fail on Noise suppression
      • 0.10% fail on Undertray (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.052% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.052% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 3.5% fail on Tyres (42% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.6% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.3% fail on Condition (54% better than other 2010 cars)
  • 3.0% fail on Steering
    • 3.0% fail on Steering linkage components (58% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.0% fail on Track rod end (66% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.052% fail on Ball joint
  • 1.2% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.73% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.42% fail on Condition
      • 0.21% fail on Prescribed areas (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.052% fail on Attachment
      • 0.052% fail on Requirements
    • 0.42% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.47% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.47% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.42% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.42% fail on Attachment
Read the Honest John Review

Search Good Garages