Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Hyundai i30 2007: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 48 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2007 Hyundai i30 were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Individual sidelight or tail light (front).

Summary

With 697 first tests, there are too few to say whether the 2007 Hyundai i30 differs from the model years either side.

At a glance

How 697 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
48 in every 100
Did not pass first time
52 in every 100364 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
18 yearsabout 102,114 miles
First tests counted
697

What failed most often

  1. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)19 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Track rod end (front)15 in every 100 failed tests

How we count this. Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Only Class 4 cars on their first MOT of the year are counted. A car that fails and is fixed at the test station still counts as a fail in the first-attempt rate. These are raw results, not adjusted for age, mileage, or peer mix. The MOT does not test engine or gearbox internals.

Note:

These are patterns across 2007 Hyundai i30 vehicles in 2025, not a prediction that any one car will have them. Faults are grouped by part of the car. They come from MOT defect codes, not manufacturer bulletins, recalls or a diagnosis of any one car.

Suspension

Three faults. The strongest is the anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (rear): 15 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 363 of 364 failed first attempts (99.7%) that recorded an odometer reading in 2025. Mileage is needed to compare like with like.

We only list faults with at least 20 failures and a rate of about 2.0 times that of similar cars, which keeps one-off results out of the list.

Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (rear)

Failed on 27 first tests15 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Excessive wear on an anti-roll bar linkage ball joint is Major. A joint likely to become detached is graded Dangerous.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 26 first tests, 7.8 times as often as on similar cars.

Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (front)

Failed on 27 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Excessive wear on an anti-roll bar linkage ball joint is Major. A joint likely to become detached is graded Dangerous.

Suspension arm ball joint (front)

Failed on 42 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A suspension arm ball joint is failed under the general suspension pin, bush or joint wording. Excessively worn is Major, and likely to become detached is graded Dangerous.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage. Advisories count notes recorded on failed first tests only.

Steering

One fault: track rod end (front), 3.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Track rod end (front)

Failed on 54 first tests3.5 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A steering ball joint with excessive wear or free play is Major, and one worn to the extent there is a serious risk of detachment is graded Dangerous. A dust cover that is damaged but still keeps dirt out is Minor, and one missing or no longer keeping dirt out is Major. Testers must tell wear from a joint's built-in clearance or spring loading.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage.

Brakes

One fault: brake performance (roller test, rear), 2.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 20 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A wheel with no recorded braking effort on the roller test is graded Dangerous. Inadequate effort, a brake grabbing severely, abnormal lag and excessive fluctuation in effort are each Major. So is significant brake effort recorded with no brake applied, which indicates a binding brake.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 22 first tests, 2.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage. Advisories count notes recorded on failed first tests only.

Advisories

Other things testers noted as worn or close to failing, more often than on similar cars.

An advisory is a note from the tester about something that has not failed yet. It is an early warning, not a fail. Advisories for the faults above are shown with those faults.

Suspension arm pins and bushes (rear)

Noted on 25 first tests3.1 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Non-component advisories (front)

Noted on 31 first tests2.8 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Brake performance (roller test, front)

Noted on 21 first tests2.8 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Shock absorbers (front)

Noted on 36 first tests2.7 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Coil spring (rear)

Noted on 74 first tests2.5 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm (rear)

Noted on 22 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Counts cover advisories recorded on failed first tests only, compared with cars of the same age and mileage.

MOT pass rates

How first tests ended, and how the pass rates are counted.

Passed first time
48in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
9in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
43in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 47.8% of 697 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 57.2%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 9 fixed and the 43 not fixed make the 52 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

Passed first time in every 100, all tested in 2025.

4060801002007201020152020Newer cars
406080100200720102020Newer cars

Newer cars are younger, so look for a jump rather than the climb. A year earlier (2024), when these cars were a year younger, 50 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
2007 This car48 in every 100697
200850 in every 1002,035
200952 in every 1007,253
201052 in every 1008,802
201152 in every 1008,041
201255 in every 1008,064
201357 in every 1009,767
201462 in every 1009,312
201567 in every 10013,052
201669 in every 1009,105
201780 in every 1006,501
201883 in every 1007,040
201986 in every 1003,989
202087 in every 1001,490
202187 in every 1001,727
202290 in every 1001,360

FAQs

Short answers about how to read this model-year guide.

With 697 first tests, there are too few to say whether the 2007 Hyundai i30 differs from the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Individual sidelight or tail light (front), about 19 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 47.8% of 697 first MOTs on the 2007 Hyundai i30 passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 57.2%. Among 364 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (rear) appears more often than on similar cars (7.4% of those tests; 27 observed failures; about 15× more often than similar cars). There is no single reliability score here; this is a pre-purchase checklist built from DVSA open data, not a guarantee for any individual car.
Ranked by how often they were actually recorded, the items that most often failed a 2007 Hyundai i30 at the first attempt were Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (19.0%) and Track rod end (front) (14.9%), each as a share of the year's failed first attempts. That is what goes wrong most often on the car. The common faults table shows a different measure: faults that are unusual compared with similar cars.
Among failed first-attempt tests we highlight patterns that appear more often than on similar cars. Top example: Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (rear) (7.4% of those tests; 27 observed failures; about 15× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (7.4% of those tests; 27 observed failures; about 15× more often than similar cars). That does not prove a design fault. Age, mileage, and how the car was used still matter. Treat it as a pre-purchase checkpoint, not a manufacturer service bulletin.
Common MOT problem areas for the 2007 Hyundai i30 include Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (rear), Track rod end (front), Suspension arm ball joint (front). These are the faults that stand out compared with similar cars, not a complete list of what can go wrong on any individual car.
Advisories flag issues noted at the test and are not a fail rate. We show advisory patterns that appear more often than on similar cars 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 MOT failure patterns for the 2007 Hyundai i30 (registration year) using UK DVSA open data for the selected test year. Patterns are compared with cars of a similar age and mileage. It is a buyer checklist from MOT defect statistics, not a full service history or manufacturer service-bulletin 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.

About this data

How this page is built and what it can (and can't) say.

These figures come from UK MOT open data for this model year. We surface common failure patterns against similar cars, not a full reliability score, and not a pass/fail verdict on any individual vehicle.

2024 2025

What we include

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

Same-day repairs

PRS means the car 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.

How we compare

We compare this model year with other Class 4 cars of similar age and mileage in the same test year. This model family is left out of the peer group so the car is not measured against itself.

What this does not cover

  • MOTs do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronics; this is not a full reliability score.
  • Common faults come from MOT defect stats, not manufacturer TSBs or recalls.
  • Age and mileage matching reduces, but does not remove, differences in how cars were used and maintained.
  • If the data for a car is too thin to say anything useful, we say so rather than guess.

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

Check any vehicle’s MOT history

Full MOT history, mileage records, and reliability insights for any UK vehicle.

Run a free check