Suzuki Swift MOT Results

Registered in 2016
88.4% pass rate
from 11,087 tests in 2020
(9.2% 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 Swift is unusually good or bad.

  • 4.6% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (30% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 2.8% fail on Headlamp aim (52% worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 2.8% fail on Headlamp aim (54% worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.018% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 0.71% fail on Stop lamp (83% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.36% fail on Position lamps (110% worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on Position lamp (110% worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.0090% fail on All position lamps
    • 0.35% fail on Direction indicators
      • 0.35% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.23% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.11% fail on Individual direction indicators
        • 0.018% fail on All direction indicators
    • 0.25% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 0.22% fail on Headlamps (57% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Headlamp (73% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
    • 0.081% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 0.081% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.081% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.063% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.027% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.027% fail on Horn
      • 0.0090% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.027% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.027% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.027% fail on Rear reflectors
  • 3.5% fail on Visibility (25% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 2.3% fail on Wipers (23% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 1.3% fail on Washers (50% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.11% fail on Driver's view
    • 0.036% fail on View to rear
      • 0.027% fail on Mirrors
      • 0.0090% fail on Indirect vision devices
    • 0.027% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.027% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.0090% fail on Bonnet
  • 2.0% fail on Brakes
    • 0.69% fail on Mechanical brake components (52% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.60% fail on Brake linings and pads (54% better than other 2016 cars)
        • 0.60% fail on Brake pads (54% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.16% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 0.16% fail on Brake discs
    • 0.69% fail on Brake performance (65% worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.52% fail on Service brake performance (120% worse than other 2016 cars)
        • 0.50% fail on Rbt (120% worse than other 2016 cars)
          • 0.41% fail on Service brake performance (140% worse than other 2016 cars)
          • 0.090% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.027% fail on Plate brake tester (4 times worse than other 2016 cars)
          • 0.018% fail on Service brake performance (9 times worse than other 2016 cars)
          • 0.0090% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.12% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 0.12% fail on Rbt (sp)
      • 0.036% fail on Brake performance not tested
      • 0.036% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.027% fail on Rbt
          • 0.018% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
          • 0.0090% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.0090% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.0090% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
      • 0.027% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.018% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.018% fail on Service brake imbalance
          • 0.0090% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.0090% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
    • 0.41% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever (3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.32% fail on Hand lever (5 times worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.090% fail on Pedal
    • 0.38% fail on Parking brake control (2 times worse than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.38% fail on Lever (3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.045% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.045% fail on Electronic stability control
    • 0.0090% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.0090% fail on Brake fluid
    • 0.0090% fail on Flexible brake hoses
  • 1.9% fail on Tyres (46% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 1.0% fail on Tread depth (40% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.82% fail on Condition (56% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.14% fail on Tyre pressure monitoring system (150% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.018% fail on Size/type
  • 0.22% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 0.081% fail on Bumpers (160% worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.054% fail on Body
      • 0.054% fail on Other body component
    • 0.036% fail on Transmission
      • 0.018% fail on Drive shafts
        • 0.018% fail on Joints
      • 0.018% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.018% fail on Joints (5 times worse than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.018% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.0090% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.0090% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
    • 0.0090% fail on Towbar
      • 0.0090% fail on Other towbar components
    • 0.0090% fail on Doors
      • 0.0090% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.0090% fail on Door condition
  • 0.15% fail on Suspension (75% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.063% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 0.018% fail on Linkage
      • 0.018% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 0.0090% fail on Anti-roll bar
      • 0.0090% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.0090% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.045% fail on Shock absorbers (75% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.036% fail on Suspension arms (76% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.027% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.018% fail on Suspension arm
    • 0.0090% fail on Wheel bearings
  • 0.14% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.11% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.099% fail on Condition
      • 0.0090% fail on Attachment
    • 0.036% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.081% fail on Identification of the vehicle (66% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.081% fail on Registration plates (66% better than other 2016 cars)
  • 0.081% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (79% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.072% fail on Exhaust emissions (80% better than other 2016 cars)
      • 0.072% fail on Spark ignition (62% better than other 2016 cars)
        • 0.045% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.036% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (70% better than other 2016 cars)
        • 0.0090% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.0090% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.0090% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 0.036% fail on Road Wheels (75% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.018% fail on Condition
    • 0.018% fail on Attachment (80% better than other 2016 cars)
  • 0.027% fail on Steering (79% better than other 2016 cars)
    • 0.027% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 0.0090% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.0090% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.0090% fail on Steering arm
Read the Honest John Review

  • Suzuki Swift (2010 - 2017)
    Excellent equipment across the range, great fun to drive regardless of the engine, sport version is huge fun, 4x4 is great for rural areas.

    Search Good Garages