Suzuki Grand Vitara MOT Results

Registered in 2010
74.4% pass rate
from 2,116 tests in 2020
(26% better than other 2010 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 2010 cars and highlighted areas where the Suzuki Grand Vitara is unusually good or bad.

  • 11% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 3.2% fail on Stop lamp
    • 2.6% fail on Direction indicators
      • 2.6% fail on Flashing type
        • 2.5% fail on Side repeaters (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.095% fail on Individual direction indicators (92% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.4% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 2.3% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.047% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 1.7% fail on Position lamps
      • 1.7% fail on Position lamp
    • 1.3% fail on Headlamps (56% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.52% fail on Headlamp levelling device (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.47% fail on Headlamp (83% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.33% fail on Headlamp cleaning device (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.2% fail on Registration plate lamp(s) (44% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.33% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.33% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.19% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 0.19% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.19% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.19% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.095% fail on Trailer electrical socket (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.095% fail on Horn
  • 8.7% fail on Brakes (22% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.5% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 2.8% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 2.8% fail on Brake pads
      • 1.3% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.3% fail on Brake discs
    • 2.3% fail on Brake performance
      • 1.4% fail on Service brake performance
        • 1.3% fail on Rbt
          • 1.1% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.33% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.047% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.047% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.38% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (72% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.19% fail on Rbt (sp) (85% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.19% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 0.33% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.28% fail on Rbt
          • 0.14% fail on Parking brake performance (73% better than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.14% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
        • 0.047% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.047% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
      • 0.28% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.19% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.19% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.095% fail on Decelerometer (sp) (14 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.19% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 2.1% fail on Rigid brake pipes (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.7% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Electronic stability control (6 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.1% fail on Anti-lock braking system (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.19% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.19% fail on Hand lever
    • 0.047% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.047% fail on Brake fluid
    • 0.047% fail on Flexible brake hoses
  • 4.8% fail on Visibility
    • 3.6% fail on Wipers (50% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.2% fail on Washers (47% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.095% fail on Driver's view
    • 0.095% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.095% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.047% fail on Bonnet
  • 3.4% fail on Suspension (69% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.2% fail on Anti-roll bars (58% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.47% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 0.28% fail on Linkage ball joints (68% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.14% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.095% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting (6 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.095% fail on Pins and bushes
    • 0.99% fail on Springs (74% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.99% fail on Coil springs (74% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.99% fail on Coil spring (74% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.71% fail on Shock absorbers (47% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.38% fail on Suspension arms (88% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.19% fail on Pins and bushes (85% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on Ball joint (92% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.047% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.047% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.047% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.047% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
  • 2.2% fail on Tyres (65% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.5% fail on Tread depth (59% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.61% fail on Condition (79% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.14% fail on Size/type
  • 1.4% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (52% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.2% fail on Exhaust emissions (54% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.85% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.43% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.38% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.095% fail on Emissions not tested
      • 0.47% fail on Compression ignition (61% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.19% fail on On or after 01/07/2008 (73% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.19% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.095% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.14% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.14% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 0.61% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.52% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.52% fail on Condition
    • 0.095% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.57% fail on Body, chassis, structure (82% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.24% fail on Exhaust system (83% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.14% fail on Transmission (88% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.095% fail on Drive shafts (92% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.095% fail on Joints (92% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.047% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.047% fail on Joints
    • 0.095% fail on Integral vehicle structure (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.047% fail on Sub-frame
        • 0.047% fail on Sub-frame condition
      • 0.047% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 0.047% fail on Towbar
      • 0.047% fail on Other towbar components
    • 0.047% fail on Seats
      • 0.047% fail on Driver's seat
  • 0.19% fail on Steering (90% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.095% fail on Electronic power steering
    • 0.047% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 0.047% fail on Track rod end
    • 0.047% fail on Steering column
  • 0.14% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.14% fail on Attachment
  • 0.095% fail on Seat belt installation check (11 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.047% fail on Anchorages
    • 0.047% fail on Belt(s)/padding
  • 0.047% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.047% fail on Registration plates
Read the Honest John Review

Search Good Garages