Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Mitsubishi L200 2008: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 53 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2008 Mitsubishi L200 were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Drive shaft joints and boots (front).

Summary

The 2008 Mitsubishi L200 follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 2,105 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
53 in every 100
Did not pass first time
47 in every 100990 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
17 yearsabout 132,948 miles
First tests counted
2,105

What failed most often

  1. Drive shaft joints and boots (front)17 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)17 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Suspension arm ball joint (front)16 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 2008 Mitsubishi L200 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 leaf spring (rear): 53 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 987 of 990 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.

Leaf spring (rear)

Failed on 78 first tests53 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Modified spring anchor or shackle brackets with more mounting holes than the chassis are not a reason to reject leaf spring suspension, and neither is a missing bump stop rubber. A fractured main leaf is graded Dangerous. A spring that is fractured or seriously weakened is graded Major.

Wheel bearings (front)

Failed on 61 first tests4.1 times as often as similar carsLikely 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 36 first tests, 2.8 times as often as on similar cars.

Shock absorbers (front)

Failed on 68 first tests2.7 times as often as similar carsPossible 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.

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

One fault: rear fog light, 8.7 times as often as on similar cars.

Rear fog light

Failed on 122 first tests8.7 times as often as similar carsStrong evidence

What it means

A missing obligatory rear fog lamp, one that is not working, or one that does not emit a steady red light is graded Major. A rear fog lamp adversely affected by the operation of any other lamp is Major too. The manual allows it to go out when main beam is switched on or when dipped beam headlamps are switched off.

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

Brakes

Three faults. The strongest is the rigid brake pipes (front): 7.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Rigid brake pipes (front)

Failed on 78 first tests7.3 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 214 first tests, 6.9 times as often as on similar cars.

Rigid brake pipes (rear)

Failed on 100 first tests4.2 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 182 first tests, 3.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake performance (roller test, front)

Failed on 43 first tests2.4 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.

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

Body and structure

One fault: chassis condition (rear), 6.7 times as often as on similar cars.

Chassis condition (rear)

Failed on 67 first tests6.7 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A main load-bearing structural member that is fractured, deformed, modified or inadequately repaired is Major when structural rigidity is significantly reduced, and Dangerous where steering or braking is likely to be adversely affected. Corrosion of the body, cab or chassis at a mounting point is Dangerous where overall security or stability is impaired.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 52 first tests, 4.4 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.

Seat belts and restraints

One fault: airbag warning light, 2.8 times as often as on similar cars.

Airbag warning light

Failed on 68 first tests2.8 times as often as similar carsPossible 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.

Noise, emissions and leaks

One fault: diesel engine warning light, 2.8 times as often as on similar cars.

Diesel engine warning light

Failed on 62 first tests2.8 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

An engine malfunction indicator lamp that is illuminated to show a malfunction is graded Major on a diesel, but only on the diesels the test covers, which depends on the vehicle type and when it was first used. DVSA lists it under exhaust emissions for compression ignition engines, and the detail line for the row also names an inoperative lamp.

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.

Leaf spring shackle pins and bushes (rear)

Noted on 42 first tests110 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Other power steering components

Noted on 24 first tests6.6 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm (front)

Noted on 79 first tests5.1 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Coil spring (front)

Noted on 81 first tests2.6 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
53in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
7in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
40in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 53.0% of 2,105 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 60.4%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 7 fixed and the 40 not fixed make the 47 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

4060801002005200820152020Older carsNewer cars
40608010020082020Older 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, 52 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200157 in every 100312
200254 in every 100592
200355 in every 1001,188
200455 in every 1001,678
200556 in every 1002,247
200654 in every 1003,816
200753 in every 1003,184
2008 This car53 in every 1002,105
200952 in every 1001,984
201053 in every 1003,059
201155 in every 1003,510
201257 in every 1002,534
201359 in every 1003,327
201463 in every 1004,243
201567 in every 1006,086
201676 in every 1006,259
201778 in every 1007,655
201880 in every 1007,430
201982 in every 1008,251
202084 in every 1004,408
202185 in every 1002,416

If you are buying one

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

Mileage matters most on a 2008 Mitsubishi L200.

Of 2008 Mitsubishi L200 vehicles with under 101,000 miles, 60 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 169,000 miles or more, 48 in every 100 did.

Under 101,000409 tests
60
101,000–124,000442 tests
52
124,000–143,000 Typical car402 tests
52
143,000–169,000427 tests
54
169,000 and over422 tests
48

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 101,000124,000–143,000169,000 and over
Drive shaft joints and boots (front)4.68.010.7
Individual sidelight or tail light (front)5.49.59.2
Suspension arm ball joint (front)5.66.59.0
Rear fog light2.47.06.9
Rigid brake pipes (rear)3.74.25.5

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

When a car fails

12in every 100

of failed cars had one item to fix.

69in 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 2008 Mitsubishi L200 follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Drive shaft joints and boots (front), about 17 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 53.0% of 2,105 first MOTs on the 2008 Mitsubishi L200 passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 60.4%. Among 990 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Rear fog light appears more often than on similar cars (12.4% of those tests; 122 observed failures; about 8.7× 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 2008 Mitsubishi L200 at the first attempt were Drive shaft joints and boots (front) (17.0%), Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (16.8%) and Suspension arm ball joint (front) (16.1%), 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: Rear fog light (12.4% of those tests; 122 observed failures; about 8.7× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Rear fog light shows up more often than on similar cars (12.4% of those tests; 122 observed failures; about 8.7× 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 2008 Mitsubishi L200 include Rear fog light, Leaf spring (rear), Rigid brake pipes (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 2008 Mitsubishi L200 (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