Suzuki Vitara MOT Results

Registered in 2002
58.4% pass rate
from 231 tests in 2020
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 2002 cars and highlighted areas where the Suzuki Vitara is unusually good or bad.

  • 17% fail on Body, chassis, structure (60% worse than other 2002 cars)
    • 6.5% fail on Transmission
      • 6.1% fail on Drive shafts
        • 6.1% fail on Joints
      • 1.3% fail on Prop shafts (5 times worse than other 2002 cars)
        • 1.3% fail on Joints (6 times worse than other 2002 cars)
    • 5.6% fail on Integral vehicle structure (5 times worse than other 2002 cars)
      • 5.6% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition (5 times worse than other 2002 cars)
    • 5.2% fail on Exhaust system
    • 1.7% fail on Chassis
      • 1.7% fail on Chassis condition
    • 0.87% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.43% fail on Tank
      • 0.43% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
      • 0.43% fail on System
    • 0.87% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.87% fail on Body
      • 0.43% fail on Panel
      • 0.43% fail on Other body component
    • 0.43% fail on Cabs
      • 0.43% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 14% fail on Brakes
    • 8.2% fail on Brake performance
      • 6.5% fail on Service brake performance (100% worse than other 2002 cars)
        • 6.1% fail on Rbt
          • 4.8% fail on Service brake performance
          • 1.7% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.43% fail on Decelerometer
          • 0.43% fail on Service brake performance (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 2.2% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 1.7% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 1.7% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.43% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 2.2% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 1.3% fail on Rbt (sp)
        • 0.87% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 1.3% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.87% fail on Rbt
          • 0.43% fail on Parking brake performance
          • 0.43% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
        • 0.43% fail on Decelerometer
          • 0.43% fail on Parking brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.43% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 5.6% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 2.2% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 1.3% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 1.3% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.87% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 0.87% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.43% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.43% fail on Cable
    • 1.3% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.87% fail on Pedal
      • 0.43% fail on Hand lever
    • 0.43% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.43% fail on Reservoirs
    • 0.43% fail on Load sensing valves
  • 12% fail on Suspension (36% better than other 2002 cars)
    • 3.0% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 3.0% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.3% fail on Linkage ball joints
      • 0.87% fail on Linkage
      • 0.43% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.43% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
    • 2.6% fail on Springs
      • 2.6% fail on Coil springs
        • 2.6% fail on Coil spring
    • 2.2% fail on Suspension arms (65% better than other 2002 cars)
      • 1.7% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.43% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 2.2% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 0.43% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 0.43% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.43% fail on Ball joint
  • 11% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (46% better than other 2002 cars)
    • 3.5% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 3.0% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.43% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 2.6% fail on Position lamps
      • 2.6% fail on Position lamp
    • 2.6% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 1.3% fail on Stop lamp (78% better than other 2002 cars)
    • 1.3% fail on Direction indicators
      • 1.3% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.87% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.43% fail on Individual direction indicators
    • 1.3% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 1.3% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 1.3% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.87% fail on Headlamps (83% better than other 2002 cars)
      • 0.43% fail on Headlamp
      • 0.43% fail on Headlamp levelling device
    • 0.87% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.43% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.43% fail on Horn
  • 7.4% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 6.9% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 5.6% fail on Spark ignition
        • 3.5% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 1.7% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 1.3% fail on Emissions not tested
      • 1.3% fail on Compression ignition
        • 0.87% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Turbo
        • 0.87% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
    • 0.43% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.43% fail on Hydraulic fluid leaks
  • 6.1% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 5.6% fail on Seat belts (150% worse than other 2002 cars)
      • 4.3% fail on Prescribed areas (170% worse than other 2002 cars)
      • 0.87% fail on Condition
      • 0.43% fail on Requirements
    • 0.43% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 4.3% fail on Visibility
    • 2.2% fail on Wipers
    • 2.2% fail on Washers
  • 4.3% fail on Tyres
    • 3.0% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.3% fail on Condition
  • 0.43% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.43% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.43% fail on Steering
    • 0.43% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 0.43% fail on Track rod end

Search Good Garages