Model Reports 8 min read Updated 12 Jul 2026

Toyota Hilux 2013: reliability & common MOT faults

Elevated MOT failure patterns for the 2013 Toyota Hilux include Chassis condition (rear) (~69.2× peers). Based on UK DVSA open data for test year 2025 (1,427 failed first-attempt tests), compared with similar age and mileage peers. Available test years: 2024, 2025.

1,427 failed first-attempt tests · 3,546 first tests (test year 2025)

Standout pattern: Chassis condition (rear) — about 69.2× more often than on similar peer cars.

Key takeaways before you buy

  • Chassis condition (rear): about 69.2× more often than similar cars

Common faults

These are MOT failure patterns that show up more often on this registration year than on similar cars of the same class, age band, and mileage in the same test year (leave-one-out peer comparison; whole model family excluded).

Statistical patterns from MOT defect codes — not manufacturer TSBs, recalls, or a diagnosis of any individual car. Fail and advisory patterns are kept separate.

Based on 1,427 failed first-attempt tests in test year 2025.

Chassis condition (rear)

This failure pattern appears about 69.2× more often than on similar peer cars — recorded on 114 failed first-attempt tests; 8.0% of failed tests for this model year.

Rear · 114 failures · ×69.2 vs similar cars · 8.0% of failed first tests · Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars

# Fault pattern Location Failures vs similar cars Share of fails Confidence
1 Chassis condition (rear)
Body, chassis, structure > Chassis > Chassis condition
 Rear 114 ×69.2 8.0% Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars
2 Spring mounting prescribed areas (rear)
Suspension > Springs > Spring mounting prescribed areas
 Rear 33 ×62.4 2.3% Likely common fault pattern
3 Chassis condition (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Chassis > Chassis condition
 Front 39 ×42.4 2.7% Likely common fault pattern
4 Leaf spring (rear)
Suspension > Springs > Leaf springs > Leaf spring
 Rear 56 ×26.7 3.9% Likely common fault pattern
5 Component mounting prescribed areas (rear)
Suspension > Component mounting prescribed areas
 Rear 92 ×14.4 6.4% Likely common fault pattern
6 Rigid brake pipes
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Any 40 ×7.9 2.8% Likely common fault pattern
7 Service brake performance
Brakes > Brake performance > Service Brake Efficiency (sp) > Rbt (sp) > Service brake performance
 Any 54 ×6.0 3.8% Likely common fault pattern
8 Service brake imbalance (front)
Brakes > Brake performance > Service brake performance > Rbt > Service brake imbalance
 Front 30 ×5.9 2.1% Likely common fault pattern
9 Service brake imbalance (rear)
Brakes > Brake performance > Service Brake Efficiency (sp) > Rbt (sp) > Service brake imbalance
 Rear 52 ×5.5 3.6% Likely common fault pattern
10 Rigid brake pipes (rear)
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Rear 86 ×5.1 6.0% Likely common fault pattern

Only patterns that clear minimum sample and elevation thresholds are shown (at least 20 failures and 2.0× peer lift).

Advisories

Advisory items recorded on failed first-attempt tests that appear elevated versus peers. Advisories are not a fail rate — they flag issues noted at the test, often before they become failures.

# Advisory pattern Location Notes vs similar cars Share Confidence
1 Chassis condition
Body, chassis, structure > Chassis > Chassis condition
 Any 127 ×35.5 8.9% Possible elevated fault
2 Chassis condition (rear)
Body, chassis, structure > Chassis > Chassis condition
 Rear 103 ×31.6 7.2% Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars
3 Chassis condition (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Chassis > Chassis condition
 Front 27 ×21.7 1.9% Likely common fault pattern
4 Integral vehicle structure condition
Body, chassis, structure > Integral vehicle structure > Integral vehicle structure condition
 Any 25 ×6.9 1.8% Elevated vs peers
5 Component mounting prescribed areas (rear)
Suspension > Component mounting prescribed areas
 Rear 43 ×5.9 3.0% Likely common fault pattern
6 Rigid brake pipes
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Any 96 ×5.0 6.7% Likely common fault pattern
7 Headlamp (front)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Headlamps > Headlamp
 Front 28 ×4.0 2.0% Elevated vs peers
8 Flexible brake hoses (front)
Brakes > Flexible brake hoses
 Front 20 ×3.9 1.4% Elevated vs peers

FAQs

We do not show a single reliability score for the 2013 Toyota Hilux on this page. Among 1,427 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Chassis condition (rear) appears more often than on similar peer cars (about 69.2× more often than peers; 114 observed failures; 8.0% of failed tests). Treat this as a pre-purchase checklist from DVSA open data — not a guarantee for any individual car.
Among failed first-attempt tests we surface patterns that appear more often than on similar peer cars. Top example: Chassis condition (rear) (about 69.2× more often than peers; 114 observed failures; 8.0% of failed tests). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Chassis condition (rear) shows up more often than on similar peer cars (about 69.2× more often than peers; 114 observed failures; 8.0% of failed tests). That does not prove a causal design fault — age, mileage, and usage still matter. Treat it as a pre-purchase check point, not a manufacturer TSB.
Common MOT problem areas for the 2013 Toyota Hilux include Chassis condition (rear). These are elevated versus similar peer cars where lift clears our floors — not a full list of every possible fault on an individual car.
Advisories flag issues noted at the test and are not a fail rate. We show advisory patterns that look elevated versus peers among failed first-attempt tests, separate from common failure rows. Use them as early-warning checks, not as a pass/fail score.
This page highlights elevated MOT failure patterns for the 2013 Toyota Hilux (registration year) using UK DVSA open data for the selected test year. Patterns are ranked against similar age and mileage peers. It is a buyer checklist from MOT defect statistics — not a full service history or manufacturer TSB list.
No. MOT tests do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronic modules. Patterns here come from MOT defect statistics only and should not be read as engine or gearbox reliability scores.
PRS means the vehicle failed items that were fixed at the test station and then passed the same day. We count PRS as a first-attempt fail in headline rates so same-day repairs do not hide problems.

About this data

Universe. UK class 4 cars only; normal MOT tests (not retests); results pass, PRS, or fail; one first test per vehicle per calendar year.

PRS policy. PRS means the vehicle failed items that were fixed at the test station and then passed the same day. We count PRS as a first-attempt fail in headline rates so same-day repairs do not hide problems.

Peer baseline. We compare this model year with other class 4 cars of similar age and mileage in the same test year, excluding the whole model family so the car is not compared with itself (leave-one-out peer baseline).

Data years. Test years covered: 2024, 2025.

Limitations.

  • MOT tests do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronic modules — so this is not a full reliability score.
  • Common faults are inferred from MOT defect statistics, not manufacturer TSBs or recalls.
  • Matching on age and mileage reduces but does not remove every usage or maintenance difference between cars.
  • Pass rates and star scores appear only when those data marts are available; this page never invents them.

Display rules config: 1

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Most reliable Toyota models

See brand-wide MOT rankings and year guidance for Toyota (separate from this model-year report).