Suzuki Celerio MOT Results

Registered in 2016
90.6% pass rate
from 8,094 tests in 2020
(24% better than other 2016 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 2016 cars and highlighted areas where the Suzuki Celerio is unusually good or bad.

  • 4.2% fail on Visibility (49% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 3.4% fail on Wipers (82% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.84% fail on Washers
    • 0.037% fail on Driver's view
    • 0.037% fail on View to rear
      • 0.037% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.025% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.025% fail on Windscreen
  • 2.4% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (31% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 1.7% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 1.7% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 0.27% fail on Stop lamp
    • 0.20% fail on Headlamps (60% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Headlamp (52% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.14% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.14% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.11% fail on Direction indicators (64% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Flashing type (64% better than other 2016 cars)
        • 0.062% fail on Individual direction indicators
        • 0.049% fail on Side repeaters (81% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.086% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.074% fail on Horn
      • 0.012% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.037% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (75% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.025% fail on Rear fog lamp (83% better than other 2016 cars)
        • 0.025% fail on Rear fog lamp (83% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.012% fail on Front fog lamps
        • 0.012% fail on Front fog lamps
    • 0.037% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.037% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.025% fail on Registration plate lamp(s) (91% better than other 2016 cars)
  • 1.7% fail on Tyres (51% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 1.1% fail on Tread depth (35% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.54% fail on Condition (71% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.062% fail on Size/type
    • 0.062% fail on Tyre pressure monitoring system
  • 1.0% fail on Brakes (50% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.43% fail on Brake performance
      • 0.31% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.31% fail on Rbt
          • 0.21% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.099% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 0.15% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp) (200% worse than other 2016 cars)
        • 0.15% fail on Rbt (sp) (2 times worse than other 2016 cars)
          • 0.14% fail on Service brake imbalance (3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
          • 0.025% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.049% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 0.049% fail on Rbt (sp)
    • 0.22% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever (140% worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.21% fail on Hand lever (3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.012% fail on Pedal
    • 0.19% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.19% fail on Lever (110% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.19% fail on Mechanical brake components (87% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.19% fail on Brake linings and pads (86% better than other 2016 cars)
        • 0.19% fail on Brake pads (86% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.025% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 0.012% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.012% fail on Electronic stability control
  • 0.42% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (66% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.35% fail on Seat belts (110% worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.33% fail on Condition (120% worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.012% fail on Attachment
    • 0.074% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.16% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 0.086% fail on Bumpers (180% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.037% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.012% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.012% fail on Pipe
    • 0.012% fail on Body
      • 0.012% fail on Other body component
    • 0.012% fail on Boot lid
      • 0.012% fail on Boot lid condition
  • 0.11% fail on Suspension (82% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.049% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 0.037% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 0.012% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.025% fail on Shock absorbers (86% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.025% fail on Suspension arms (83% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.025% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.012% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.012% fail on Springs
      • 0.012% fail on Coil springs
        • 0.012% fail on Coil spring
        • 0.012% fail on Mounting
    • 0.012% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
  • 0.074% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (81% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.074% fail on Exhaust emissions (80% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.074% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.025% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.025% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (79% better than other 2016 cars)
        • 0.025% fail on Emissions not tested
      • 0.012% fail on Compression ignition
        • 0.012% fail on Emission control equipment
          • 0.012% fail on Catalytic converter
        • 0.012% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.037% fail on Identification of the vehicle (84% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.037% fail on Registration plates (84% better than other 2016 cars)
  • 0.025% fail on Road Wheels (83% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.025% fail on Attachment
  • 0.012% fail on Steering
    • 0.012% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 0.012% fail on Track rod end
Read the Honest John Review

  • Suzuki Celerio (2015 - 2019)
    Cheap to buy. Low running costs. Good level of standard equipment. Spacious cabin and boot. Comfortable and easy to drive. Brake problem resolved.

    Search Good Garages