SAAB 9-5 MOT Results
Registered in 201073.2% pass rate
from 714 tests in 2017
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 SAAB 9-5 is unusually good or bad.
-
13% fail on
Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
-
5.7% fail on
Position lamps
(94% worse than other 2010 cars)
- 5.6% fail on Front lamps (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
- 0.28% fail on Rear lamps
-
2.9% fail on
Headlamps
- 2.7% fail on Headlamp
-
0.42% fail on
Headlamp defects which don't require an aim check on retest
(6 times worse than other 2010 cars)
- 0.28% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
- 0.14% fail on Main beam 'tell-tale'
-
0.14% fail on
Headlamp defects which do require an aim check on retest
- 0.14% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
- 2.5% fail on Headlamp aim
- 1.4% fail on Stop lamp
- 1.1% fail on Registration plate lamp (69% better than other 2010 cars)
-
0.56% fail on
Rear fog lamp
- 0.56% fail on Fog lamp
- 0.28% fail on Battery
-
0.28% fail on
Direction indicators
(82% better than other 2010 cars)
-
0.28% fail on
Flashing type
(82% better than other 2010 cars)
- 0.14% fail on Individual lamps
- 0.14% fail on Side repeaters
-
0.28% fail on
Flashing type
(82% better than other 2010 cars)
- 0.14% fail on Horn
-
5.7% fail on
Position lamps
(94% worse than other 2010 cars)
-
6.4% fail on
Suspension
-
2.7% fail on
Coil springs
- 2.7% fail on Condition
-
1.7% fail on
Shock absorbers
- 1.7% fail on Condition
-
0.98% fail on
Anti-roll bars
- 0.70% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
- 0.28% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
-
0.56% fail on
Suspension arms
- 0.56% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
-
0.42% fail on
Wheel bearings
- 0.28% fail on Rear
- 0.14% fail on Front
- 0.42% fail on Front suspension joints
-
0.14% fail on
Sub-frames
- 0.14% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
-
2.7% fail on
Coil springs
-
5.9% fail on
Brakes
-
2.9% fail on
Hub components
- 2.4% fail on Brake pads
- 0.56% fail on Brake discs
- 0.14% fail on Brake calipers
-
2.4% fail on
Brake performance
- 1.1% fail on Parking brake performance
- 0.98% fail on Rear wheels
- 0.28% fail on Brake imbalance
- 0.28% fail on Front wheels
- 0.14% fail on Gradient hand brake
- 0.14% fail on Brake performance not tested
-
0.56% fail on
Hydraulic systems
-
0.42% fail on
Components
- 0.28% fail on Hoses
- 0.14% fail on Pipes
- 0.14% fail on Leaks
-
0.42% fail on
Components
-
0.42% fail on
Parking brake
- 0.28% fail on Condition
- 0.14% fail on Electronic parking brake
-
0.28% fail on
Mechanical components
(8 times worse than other 2010 cars)
- 0.28% fail on Lever (64 times worse than other 2010 cars)
- 0.28% fail on ABS
- 0.28% fail on Restricted movement
- 0.14% fail on Electronic stability system
-
2.9% fail on
Hub components
-
4.8% fail on
Tyres
- 2.9% fail on Condition
- 1.5% fail on Tread depth (56% better than other 2010 cars)
- 0.28% fail on Size/type
-
4.2% fail on
Driver's view of the road
- 2.8% fail on Wipers
- 1.1% fail on Washers
- 0.28% fail on Windscreen
-
2.0% fail on
Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
-
1.4% fail on
Fuel system
(5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
- 1.4% fail on System (22 times worse than other 2010 cars)
- 0.42% fail on Exhaust system
- 0.28% fail on Emissions
- 0.14% fail on Emissions not tested
-
1.4% fail on
Fuel system
(5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
-
0.84% fail on
Steering
-
0.28% fail on
Steering control
(14 times worse than other 2010 cars)
- 0.28% fail on Steering lock (208 times worse than other 2010 cars)
-
0.28% fail on
Steering system
- 0.28% fail on Track rod end
- 0.14% fail on Ball joint
-
0.28% fail on
Power steering
- 0.28% fail on Other components (21 times worse than other 2010 cars)
-
0.28% fail on
Steering control
(14 times worse than other 2010 cars)
-
0.56% fail on
Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
-
0.56% fail on
Seat belts
- 0.56% fail on Condition
-
0.56% fail on
Seat belts
-
0.56% fail on
Registration plates and VIN
- 0.56% fail on Registration plate
-
0.42% fail on
Body, Structure and General Items
- 0.14% fail on Body condition
-
0.14% fail on
Doors
- 0.14% fail on Passengers other
-
0.14% fail on
Seats
- 0.14% fail on Passengers
Read the Honest John Review
-
Saab 9-5 (2010 - 2011)
Distinctive design. Comfortable cabin. Impressive rear passenger room and large boot. Fuel efficient 2.0 TiD engine. Well equipped as standard.