MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Suzuki » Swift » 2017

Suzuki Swift MOT Results

Registered in 2017
87.2% pass rate
from 8,206 tests in 2021
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 2017 cars and highlighted areas where the Suzuki Swift is unusually good or bad.

  • 6.0% fail on Visibility (63% worse than other 2017 cars)
    • 5.3% fail on Wipers (95% worse than other 2017 cars)
    • 0.80% fail on Washers
    • 0.024% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.024% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.012% fail on View to rear
      • 0.012% fail on Mirrors
  • 2.3% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 1.3% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 1.3% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 0.39% fail on Stop lamp
    • 0.32% fail on Direction indicators
      • 0.32% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.16% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.13% fail on Individual direction indicators (120% worse than other 2017 cars)
        • 0.024% fail on All direction indicators
    • 0.18% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 0.085% fail on Headlamps (83% better than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.073% fail on Headlamp (83% better than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.012% fail on Headlamp levelling device
    • 0.049% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 0.049% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.049% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.037% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.037% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.024% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.012% fail on Electrical wiring
      • 0.012% fail on Battery(ies)
    • 0.012% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.012% fail on Position lamp
  • 2.0% fail on Brakes
    • 1.1% fail on Mechanical brake components (26% better than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.91% fail on Brake linings and pads (27% better than other 2017 cars)
        • 0.91% fail on Brake pads (26% better than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.27% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 0.27% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.024% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.024% fail on Lever
    • 0.67% fail on Brake performance
      • 0.48% fail on Service brake performance (68% worse than other 2017 cars)
        • 0.46% fail on Rbt (67% worse than other 2017 cars)
          • 0.45% fail on Service brake performance (96% worse than other 2017 cars)
          • 0.024% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.012% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.012% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.11% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 0.097% fail on Rbt (sp)
        • 0.012% fail on Plate brake tester (sp)
      • 0.097% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.085% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.085% fail on Service brake imbalance
          • 0.012% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.012% fail on Plate brake tester (sp)
          • 0.012% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 0.037% fail on Brake performance not tested
      • 0.024% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.024% fail on Rbt
          • 0.012% fail on Parking brake performance
          • 0.012% fail on Parking brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
    • 0.18% fail on Parking brake control (130% worse than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Lever (190% worse than other 2017 cars)
    • 0.15% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever (130% worse than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.12% fail on Hand lever (2 times worse than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.024% fail on Pedal
    • 0.024% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 0.024% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.012% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.012% fail on Reservoirs
    • 0.012% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.012% fail on Anti-lock braking system
  • 1.9% fail on Tyres (43% better than other 2017 cars)
    • 0.99% fail on Condition (50% better than other 2017 cars)
    • 0.96% fail on Tread depth (38% better than other 2017 cars)
    • 0.037% fail on Size/type
  • 0.87% fail on Suspension
    • 0.71% fail on Springs (110% worse than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.71% fail on Coil springs (110% worse than other 2017 cars)
        • 0.71% fail on Coil spring (110% worse than other 2017 cars)
    • 0.097% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 0.049% fail on Ball joint dust cover (3 times worse than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.037% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 0.012% fail on Linkage ball joints
    • 0.049% fail on Suspension arms (79% better than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.024% fail on Suspension arm
      • 0.012% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.012% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.024% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 0.012% fail on Wheel bearings
  • 0.12% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.12% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.11% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.085% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.085% fail on Condition
    • 0.024% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.11% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (80% better than other 2017 cars)
    • 0.073% fail on Exhaust emissions (86% better than other 2017 cars)
      • 0.073% fail on Spark ignition (77% better than other 2017 cars)
        • 0.037% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.024% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (88% better than other 2017 cars)
        • 0.012% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.037% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.037% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 0.085% fail on Body, chassis, structure (72% better than other 2017 cars)
    • 0.037% fail on Transmission
      • 0.037% fail on Drive shafts
        • 0.024% fail on Joints
        • 0.012% fail on Drive shaft
    • 0.024% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.012% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.012% fail on Doors
      • 0.012% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.012% fail on Door condition
  • 0.085% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.085% fail on Attachment
  • 0.024% fail on Steering (84% better than other 2017 cars)
    • 0.024% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 0.024% fail on Locking devices (13 times worse than other 2017 cars)
Read the Honest John Review

  • Suzuki Swift (2017 - 2024)
    Revvy 1.0 Boosterjet engine, stylish with plenty of kerbside appeal, really good fun on twisty roads, engines are refined and economical.
  • 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