Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Mitsubishi ASX 2012: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 66 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2012 Mitsubishi ASX were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Track rod end (front).

Summary

The 2012 Mitsubishi ASX follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 1,909 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
66 in every 100
Did not pass first time
34 in every 100643 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
13 yearsabout 101,176 miles
First tests counted
1,909

What failed most often

  1. Track rod end (front)13 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)11 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (front)9 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 2012 Mitsubishi ASX 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.

Body and structure

One fault: exhaust system (rear), 5.8 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 643 failed first attempts in 2025 that had a mileage recorded, which allows a like-for-like comparison.

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.

Exhaust system (rear)

Failed on 53 first tests5.8 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Exhaust fumes causing a danger to health of persons on board are graded Dangerous, and so is a silencer likely to become detached. Fumes entering the cabin are Major. One or more missing or defective mountings does not necessarily make the exhaust insecure, since testers assess the overall security of the system.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 28 first tests, 2.5 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.

Brakes

One fault: rigid brake pipes (rear), 5.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Rigid brake pipes (rear)

Failed on 48 first tests5.6 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Chafing, corrosion or damage to a rigid brake pipe justifies rejection once its wall thickness is reduced by a set amount, although DVSA accepts this is not easy to determine. If a tester is not sure, the benefit of the doubt applies. A leaking pipe or connection is graded Dangerous on a hydraulic system and Major on an air system.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 82 first tests, 3.4 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.

Suspension

Four faults. The strongest is the shock absorbers (front): 3.8 times as often as on similar cars.

Shock absorbers (front)

Failed on 46 first tests3.8 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Slight seepage that leaves a film of fluid on a shock absorber does not fail it. Severe leakage, or damage so that it does not function, is Major. A shock absorber missing or likely to become detached is graded Dangerous, though a missing one is only rejected if shock absorbers were fitted as standard.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 64 first tests, 3.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Anti-roll bar ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 25 first tests2.5 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A missing anti-roll bar ball joint dust cover is Major, and so is one that no longer prevents the ingress of dirt. A cover that is only severely deteriorated is Minor. DVSA uses one wording for the dust cover on any suspension joint.

Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (front)

Failed on 42 first tests2.2 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.

Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 55 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A suspension joint dust cover that is severely deteriorated is Minor. It becomes Major once it is missing or no longer prevents the ingress of dirt, so what matters is whether it still keeps dirt out. DVSA words this for any suspension joint dust cover, and files it here under anti-roll bars.

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 84 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.

Anti-roll bar pins and bushes (rear)

Noted on 23 first tests15 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension mounting area (rear)

Noted on 21 first tests4.5 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension sub-frame (rear)

Noted on 110 first tests4.0 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm (front)

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

Suspension sub-frame (front)

Noted on 50 first tests2.9 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm pins and bushes (rear)

Noted on 37 first tests2.9 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
66in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
5in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
29in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 66.3% of 1,909 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 70.9%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 5 fixed and the 29 not fixed make the 34 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Petrol and diesel

First testsPassed first time, as tested
Diesel99064
Petrol91869

Figures are in every 100 first tests.

Same model, other years

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

406080100201220152020Older carsNewer cars
40608010020122020Newer 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, 68 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
201060 in every 1001,330
201162 in every 1001,815
2012 This car66 in every 1001,909
201364 in every 1002,247
201468 in every 1003,515
201575 in every 1004,293
201678 in every 1003,059
201779 in every 1003,837
201884 in every 1002,125
201990 in every 1001,551
202090 in every 1001,428
202190 in every 100490

FAQs

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

The 2012 Mitsubishi ASX follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Track rod end (front), about 13 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 66.3% of 1,909 first MOTs on the 2012 Mitsubishi ASX passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 70.9%. Among 643 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Exhaust system (rear) appears more often than on similar cars (8.2% of those tests; 53 observed failures; about 5.8× 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 2012 Mitsubishi ASX at the first attempt were Track rod end (front) (13.1%), Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (11.4%) and Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (front) (8.6%), 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: Exhaust system (rear) (8.2% of those tests; 53 observed failures; about 5.8× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Exhaust system (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (8.2% of those tests; 53 observed failures; about 5.8× 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 2012 Mitsubishi ASX include Exhaust system (rear), Rigid brake pipes (rear), Shock absorbers (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 2012 Mitsubishi ASX (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