Subaru Forester MOT Results

Registered in 2010
68.8% pass rate
from 1,076 tests in 2020
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 2010 cars and highlighted areas where the Subaru Forester is unusually good or bad.

  • 15% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 5.6% fail on Stop lamp (86% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.0% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 3.8% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.19% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 3.7% fail on Headlamps
      • 2.1% fail on Headlamp levelling device (20 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.6% fail on Headlamp
      • 0.19% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
    • 3.1% fail on Position lamps
      • 3.1% fail on Position lamp
    • 2.1% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 1.7% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.7% fail on Rear fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.7% fail on Rear fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.093% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.093% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.093% fail on Rear reflectors
  • 9.0% fail on Suspension
    • 5.0% fail on Anti-roll bars (73% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.0% fail on Pins and bushes (40 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.9% fail on Linkage ball joints (110% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.56% fail on Linkage
      • 0.56% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.46% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 0.28% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
      • 0.19% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.093% fail on Anti-roll bar
      • 0.093% fail on Linkage attachment bracket and mounting
    • 4.2% fail on Suspension arms
      • 2.7% fail on Pins and bushes (110% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.93% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.46% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.19% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting (16 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.84% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.19% fail on Springs (95% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.19% fail on Coil springs (95% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.19% fail on Coil spring (95% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.19% fail on Shock absorbers (86% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.093% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.093% fail on Ball joint dust cover
  • 6.9% fail on Brakes
    • 3.6% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 3.1% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 3.1% fail on Brake pads
      • 1.0% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.0% fail on Brake discs
        • 0.093% fail on Brake drums
    • 2.1% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.0% fail on Electronic stability control (12 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.093% fail on Anti-lock braking system
    • 1.7% fail on Brake performance (47% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.93% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.84% fail on Rbt
          • 0.84% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.093% fail on Decelerometer
          • 0.093% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.46% fail on Brake performance not tested (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.19% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (86% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.093% fail on Rbt (sp)
        • 0.093% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 0.093% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.093% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
    • 0.19% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.19% fail on Pedal
    • 0.19% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.19% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers
    • 0.093% fail on Rigid brake pipes
  • 4.6% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (60% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.5% fail on Exhaust emissions (67% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.7% fail on Compression ignition (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 2.0% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.37% fail on Emissions not tested (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.19% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
        • 0.093% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Non turbo
      • 1.9% fail on Spark ignition
        • 1.5% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.56% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.093% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.093% fail on Noise suppression
      • 0.093% fail on Undertray
  • 3.8% fail on Visibility
    • 2.5% fail on Wipers
    • 1.3% fail on Washers
    • 0.093% fail on Bonnet
    • 0.093% fail on View to rear
      • 0.093% fail on Mirrors
  • 3.0% fail on Tyres (53% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.5% fail on Condition (49% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.5% fail on Tread depth (60% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.093% fail on Size/type
  • 2.2% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 1.0% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.93% fail on Transmission
      • 0.84% fail on Drive shafts
        • 0.84% fail on Joints
      • 0.093% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.093% fail on Joints
    • 0.093% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.093% fail on Body
      • 0.093% fail on Body condition
    • 0.093% fail on Seats
      • 0.093% fail on Driver's seat
  • 0.84% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.84% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.65% fail on Steering (64% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.46% fail on Steering linkage components (70% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.19% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.093% fail on Drag link end
      • 0.093% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.093% fail on Locking devices
    • 0.19% fail on Steering gear
      • 0.19% fail on Steering rack
  • 0.28% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.19% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.19% fail on Condition
    • 0.093% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.19% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.19% fail on Attachment
Read the Honest John Review

Search Good Garages