MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Subaru » Forester » 2005

Subaru Forester MOT Results

Registered in 2005
63.3% pass rate
from 1,476 tests in 2021
(19% better than other 2005 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 2005 cars and highlighted areas where the Subaru Forester is unusually good or bad.

  • 16% fail on Suspension
    • 6.9% fail on Anti-roll bars (30% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 3.5% fail on Linkage ball joints (110% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Ball joint (150% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.81% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover (51% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.68% fail on Pins and bushes (160% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.61% fail on Linkage
      • 0.34% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting (7 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.27% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.068% fail on Anti-roll bar
      • 0.068% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
    • 5.0% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas (180% worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 4.1% fail on Suspension arms (31% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Ball joint
      • 1.5% fail on Suspension arm (3 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.68% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.27% fail on Pins and bushes (90% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
    • 2.6% fail on Sub-frames (4 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 2.1% fail on Sub-frame (8 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.61% fail on Sub-frame mounting prescribed areas (2 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.068% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
    • 1.2% fail on Other suspension component (200% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.75% fail on Ball joint (2 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.41% fail on Ball joint dust cover (3 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.068% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.068% fail on Pins and bushes
    • 1.1% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 0.75% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.61% fail on Springs (87% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.61% fail on Coil springs (87% better than other 2005 cars)
        • 0.61% fail on Coil spring (87% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 0.14% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.14% fail on Macpherson strut
    • 0.068% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.068% fail on Suspension rod
  • 12% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (22% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 4.2% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.3% fail on Headlamp (33% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 1.0% fail on Headlamp levelling device (2 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 3.1% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 2.8% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.34% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 3.0% fail on Stop lamp
    • 2.1% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 0.81% fail on Direction indicators (69% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.81% fail on Flashing type (69% better than other 2005 cars)
        • 0.47% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.27% fail on Individual direction indicators (85% better than other 2005 cars)
        • 0.068% fail on All direction indicators
    • 0.75% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.54% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.14% fail on Trailer electrical socket (7 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.068% fail on Horn
    • 0.61% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 0.61% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.61% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.20% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.20% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.068% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.068% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.068% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.068% fail on Mandatory tell-tales
      • 0.068% fail on Rear fog lamp tell-tale
  • 11% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (63% worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 11% fail on Exhaust emissions (69% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 11% fail on Spark ignition (110% worse than other 2005 cars)
        • 6.2% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (130% worse than other 2005 cars)
        • 5.1% fail on Catalyst emissions (130% worse than other 2005 cars)
        • 1.8% fail on Emissions not tested (120% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.27% fail on Compression ignition (81% better than other 2005 cars)
        • 0.14% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.068% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Turbo
        • 0.068% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Non turbo
    • 0.34% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.20% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.068% fail on Transmission oil leaks
      • 0.068% fail on Other leaks
    • 0.068% fail on Noise suppression
      • 0.068% fail on Sound deadening material
  • 8.1% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 4.3% fail on Exhaust system (51% worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 1.9% fail on Transmission (47% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 1.6% fail on Drive shafts (52% better than other 2005 cars)
        • 1.6% fail on Joints (53% better than other 2005 cars)
        • 0.068% fail on Drive shaft
      • 0.14% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.068% fail on Prop shaft
        • 0.068% fail on Joints
      • 0.14% fail on Belts (24 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 1.4% fail on Integral vehicle structure (120% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition (110% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.068% fail on Sub-frame
        • 0.068% fail on Sub-frame condition
    • 0.61% fail on Chassis
      • 0.61% fail on Chassis condition
    • 0.34% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.14% fail on Pipe
      • 0.14% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
      • 0.068% fail on Hose
    • 0.14% fail on Body
      • 0.068% fail on Panel
      • 0.068% fail on Other body component
    • 0.068% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.068% fail on Boot lid
      • 0.068% fail on Other boot lid component
  • 6.8% fail on Brakes (49% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 2.6% fail on Brake performance (64% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 1.6% fail on Service brake performance (45% better than other 2005 cars)
        • 1.3% fail on Rbt (56% better than other 2005 cars)
          • 1.2% fail on Service brake performance (51% better than other 2005 cars)
          • 0.068% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.34% fail on Decelerometer (9 times worse than other 2005 cars)
          • 0.34% fail on Service brake performance (10 times worse than other 2005 cars)
        • 0.068% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.068% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.47% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.34% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.27% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.20% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.14% fail on Decelerometer (sp) (6 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.47% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (89% better than other 2005 cars)
        • 0.34% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
        • 0.14% fail on Rbt (sp) (97% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Parking brake performance (87% better than other 2005 cars)
        • 0.20% fail on Rbt (87% better than other 2005 cars)
          • 0.14% fail on Parking brake performance (90% better than other 2005 cars)
          • 0.068% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
      • 0.14% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 2.3% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 1.4% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 1.4% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.95% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 0.88% fail on Brake discs
        • 0.068% fail on Brake drums
    • 1.7% fail on Rigid brake pipes (41% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 1.0% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.75% fail on Anti-lock braking system
      • 0.34% fail on Electronic stability control
    • 0.20% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.14% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.14% fail on Pedal
    • 0.14% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.14% fail on Brake fluid
    • 0.068% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.068% fail on Lever
    • 0.068% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.068% fail on Hydraulic brake cylinder
    • 0.068% fail on Other components and prescribed areas
      • 0.068% fail on Other components
  • 6.3% fail on Visibility
    • 4.1% fail on Washers
    • 2.3% fail on Wipers (39% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 0.27% fail on Bonnet
    • 0.068% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.068% fail on Windscreen
  • 2.9% fail on Tyres (55% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 1.6% fail on Tread depth (58% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 1.4% fail on Condition (51% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 0.068% fail on Size/type
  • 2.3% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 1.9% fail on Seat belts
      • 1.4% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.34% fail on Condition
      • 0.27% fail on Requirements (6 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 0.41% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp (73% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 0.068% fail on Airbags
      • 0.068% fail on Drivers airbag
      • 0.068% fail on Passengers airbag
  • 0.81% fail on Steering (79% better than other 2005 cars)
    • 0.41% fail on Power steering
      • 0.27% fail on Operation
      • 0.14% fail on Other components
      • 0.068% fail on Pipes and hoses
    • 0.34% fail on Steering linkage components (88% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Track rod end (92% better than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.068% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.068% fail on Locking devices
    • 0.068% fail on Steering gear
      • 0.068% fail on Steering rack
  • 0.34% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.34% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.27% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.27% fail on Attachment
Read the Honest John Review

  • Subaru Forester (2002 - 2008)
    Very useful off-road yet an enjoyable car-like drive on tarmac. Looks and feels classier than its predecessor. Well built. Owners rate it.

    Search Good Garages