Model Reports 5 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Mitsubishi Colt 2010: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 56 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2010 Mitsubishi Colt were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Individual sidelight or tail light (front).

Summary

The 2010 Mitsubishi Colt follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 2,272 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
56 in every 100
Did not pass first time
44 in every 1001,010 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
15 yearsabout 80,347 miles
First tests counted
2,272

What failed most often

  1. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)17 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Drive shaft joints and boots (front)12 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front)10 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 2010 Mitsubishi Colt 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

Four faults. The strongest is the anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front): 29 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 1,010 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.

Anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front)

Failed on 65 first tests29 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Excessive wear in an anti-roll bar linkage pin or bush is Major. If the pin or bush is likely to become detached, it is graded Dangerous. The wording is DVSA's general one 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 53 first tests, 11 times as often as on similar cars.

Anti-roll bar linkage (front)

Failed on 42 first tests18 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

An anti-roll bar linkage is graded Dangerous when a suspension component is missing, likely to become detached, fractured or likely to fail. Insecure attachment that impairs directional stability is graded Dangerous too. Excessive damage or corrosion that seriously weakens the part is Major, and so is plain insecure attachment to the chassis or axle.

Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 105 first tests5.2 times as often as similar carsStrong evidence

What it means

Whether a suspension arm ball joint dust cover still keeps dirt out decides its grade. Severely deteriorated is Minor, while missing, or no longer preventing the ingress of dirt, is Major.

Wheel bearings (rear)

Failed on 25 first tests3.8 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Excessive play in a wheel bearing, or a bearing that is excessively rough, is Major. Play so excessive that the bearing is likely to break up or directional control is impaired is Dangerous, and so is a bearing so rough that it is likely to overheat or break up.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 22 first tests, 4.5 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.

Lamps and electrical

Three faults. The strongest is the horn: 6.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Horn

Failed on 71 first tests6.6 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A horn that does not work, or is likely to be confused with an emergency vehicle siren, is graded Major. Gongs, bells, sirens and anything with more than one tone, which includes a horn that alternates between its notes, are not allowed, except a gong, bell or siren on vehicles first used before a set date. Sound defects are Minor for named cases such as a bell or harsh sound, and Major under a general row.

Individual sidelight or tail light (rear)

Failed on 82 first tests3.4 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A position lamp showing red light to the front or white light to the rear is Major. Rear lamps must show a steady red light, and front ones can show white, predominantly white with a blue tinge, or yellow if combined in a yellow headlamp. With a multiple light source, up to half not working is Minor and more than half is Major.

Number plate lights (rear)

Failed on 89 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Registration plate lamps must light up the rear registration plate and operate at the same time as the position lamps. A missing or inoperative lamp is Major when the plate has only one lamp or all its lamps are not working, and Minor when the plate has several lamps or light sources and not all have failed. A lamp throwing direct white light to the rear is also Minor.

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

Seat belts and restraints

One fault: airbag warning light, 3.7 times as often as on similar cars.

Airbag warning light

Failed on 50 first tests3.7 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

The airbag warning lamp (SRS MIL in DVSA's wording) is failed only if it indicates a system malfunction, which is Major. A lamp lit to show the passenger airbag is disabled is not to be regarded as a defect. Dashboard messages are not a defect in their own right, though they can help the tester confirm a malfunction.

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

Body and structure

One fault: drive shaft joints and boots (front), 2.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Drive shaft joints and boots (front)

Failed on 124 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A constant velocity boot that is only severely deteriorated is Minor. It is Major once it is missing, split or insecure so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt. A transmission joint excessively worn is Major, and graded Dangerous when it is so worn it is likely to fail.

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

Visibility

One fault: windscreen wipers (front), 2.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Windscreen wipers (front)

Failed on 68 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Only a clearly damaged or worn windscreen wiper needs to be rejected. A wiper that is missing or not working is graded Major, and so is a blade that is missing or obviously not clearing the windscreen. A defective blade is graded Minor.

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.

Vehicle structure condition (rear)

Noted on 21 first tests5.9 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension mounting area (rear)

Noted on 34 first tests2.7 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

Swivel pins and bushes (rear)

Noted on 20 first tests2.0 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
56in 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
35in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 55.5% of 2,272 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 65.5%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 9 fixed and the 35 not fixed make the 44 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

40608010020052010Older carsNewer cars
4060801002010Older carsNewer 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
200452 in every 100300
200551 in every 1001,402
200651 in every 1002,016
200749 in every 1002,691
200850 in every 1003,283
200953 in every 1003,292
2010 This car56 in every 1002,272
201162 in every 1001,510
201263 in every 1001,347
201365 in every 100479

If you are buying one

What this year's MOT record means for the decision in front of you.

Mileage matters most on a 2010 Mitsubishi Colt.

Of 2010 Mitsubishi Colt vehicles with under 53,000 miles, 66 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 109,000 miles or more, 46 in every 100 did.

Under 53,000462 tests
66
53,000–72,000448 tests
63
72,000–88,000 Typical car453 tests
51
88,000–109,000456 tests
51
109,000 and over452 tests
46

What to check at your mileage

How often each fault turned up on a failed first test, by the car's mileage. Read it as: what is likely to need looking at on a car like the one in front of you.

Under 53,00072,000–88,000109,000 and over
Individual sidelight or tail light (front)1.99.510.4
Drive shaft joints and boots (front)5.46.25.3
Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front)2.25.57.5
Number plate lights0.64.66.0
Track rod end (front)0.65.36.0

Faults per 100 first tests, by the car's mileage at the test.

When a car fails

24in every 100

of failed cars had one item to fix.

52in every 100

of failed cars had three or more items to fix.

10in every 100

of all first tests had a defect the tester marked dangerous (unsafe to drive away).

Every figure here is a first-attempt MOT rate from DVSA open data for this model line, for cars of this model year tested in 2025. Each mileage band holds a fifth of the tests. MOTs do not test engine or gearbox internals, so this is a pre-purchase checklist, not a full reliability score.

FAQs

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

The 2010 Mitsubishi Colt follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Individual sidelight or tail light (front), about 17 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 55.5% of 2,272 first MOTs on the 2010 Mitsubishi Colt passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 65.5%. Among 1,010 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front) appears more often than on similar cars (10.4% of those tests; 105 observed failures; about 5.2× 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 2010 Mitsubishi Colt at the first attempt were Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (16.5%), Drive shaft joints and boots (front) (12.3%) and Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front) (10.4%), 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: Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front) (10.4% of those tests; 105 observed failures; about 5.2× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (10.4% of those tests; 105 observed failures; about 5.2× 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 2010 Mitsubishi Colt include Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front), Anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front), Anti-roll bar linkage (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 2010 Mitsubishi Colt (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