Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Mercedes-Benz ML 2003: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 59 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2003 Mercedes-Benz ML were passes.

Summary

With 698 first tests, there are too few to say whether the 2003 Mercedes-Benz ML differs from the model years either side. Treat the faults below as a checklist.

At a glance

How 698 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
59 in every 100
Did not pass first time
41 in every 100289 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
22 yearsabout 128,900 miles
First tests counted
698

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 2003 Mercedes-Benz ML 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

Two faults. The strongest is the anti-roll bar pins and bushes (front): 12 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 287 of 289 failed first attempts (99.3%) 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 pins and bushes (front)

Failed on 25 first tests12 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

An anti-roll bar pin or bush that is excessively worn is Major, and one likely to become detached is graded Dangerous. The wording is DVSA's general rule for a suspension pin, bush or joint.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 29 first tests, 7.7 times as often as on similar cars.

Coil spring (rear)

Failed on 41 first tests5.7 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A missing bump stop rubber is not a reason to fail a coil spring. When the vehicle is jacked and lowered, a spring that does not correctly locate as the suspension returns to its normal running position is rejected as insecurely attached. A missing spring is Major, and graded Dangerous where directional control is affected.

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), 2.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Track rod end (front)

Failed on 36 first tests2.5 times as often as similar carsPossible 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.

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.

Brake pads (rear)

Noted on 32 first tests3.8 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

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
59in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
6in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
35in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 58.6% of 698 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 64.8%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 6 fixed and the 35 not fixed make the 41 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

406080100200320102015Older carsNewer cars
40608010020032010Newer 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, 57 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200156 in every 100348
200259 in every 100619
2003 This car59 in every 100698
200457 in every 100937
200559 in every 100724
200667 in every 1001,315
200767 in every 1001,649
200867 in every 1001,811
200967 in every 1001,700
201068 in every 1002,334
201170 in every 1002,327
201276 in every 1002,402
201380 in every 1003,959
201480 in every 1003,654
201581 in every 1003,031

FAQs

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

With 698 first tests, there are too few to say whether the 2003 Mercedes-Benz ML differs from the model years either side. Treat the faults below as a checklist. In 2025, 58.6% of 698 first MOTs on the 2003 Mercedes-Benz ML passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 64.8%. Among 289 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Anti-roll bar pins and bushes (front) appears more often than on similar cars (8.7% of those tests; 25 observed failures; about 12× 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.
Among failed first-attempt tests we highlight patterns that appear more often than on similar cars. Top example: Anti-roll bar pins and bushes (front) (8.7% of those tests; 25 observed failures; about 12× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Anti-roll bar pins and bushes (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (8.7% of those tests; 25 observed failures; about 12× 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 2003 Mercedes-Benz ML include Anti-roll bar pins and bushes (front), Coil spring (rear), Track rod end (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 2003 Mercedes-Benz ML (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