Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Suzuki Alto 2004: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 49 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2004 Suzuki Alto were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Drive shaft joints and boots (front).

Summary

With 615 first tests, there are too few to say whether the 2004 Suzuki Alto differs from the model years either side.

At a glance

How 615 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
49 in every 100
Did not pass first time
51 in every 100313 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
21 yearsabout 53,455 miles
First tests counted
615

What failed most often

  1. Drive shaft joints and boots (front)17 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Petrol engine warning light17 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 2004 Suzuki Alto 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.

Brakes

Three faults. The strongest is the brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear): 7.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 313 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.

Brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear)

Failed on 45 first tests7.3 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A wheel giving less than a set share of the maximum effort from the other wheel on the same axle is Major. On a steered axle, less than half is graded Dangerous. Testers disregard an imbalance if the lower effort is the result of a locked wheel, or if the higher effort from a wheel is at or below a low set figure.

Brake efficiency below minimum (roller test)

Failed on 23 first tests4.5 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Service brake efficiency below the minimum requirement is Major, and efficiency less than half of the required value is graded Dangerous. On a roller brake tester, if more than half of the wheels of a brake system lock, the efficiency requirement for that system counts as met.

Brake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 20 first tests2.2 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.

Suspension

One fault: suspension arm ball joint (front), 4.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Suspension arm ball joint (front)

Failed on 43 first tests4.4 times as often as similar carsLikely 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.

Body and structure

One fault: drive shaft joints and boots (front), 3.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Drive shaft joints and boots (front)

Failed on 53 first tests3.5 times as often as similar carsLikely 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.

Noise, emissions and leaks

One fault: petrol engine warning light, 3.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Petrol engine warning light

Failed on 52 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

The malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) on a petrol engine is a Major failure when it is illuminated indicating a malfunction. The detail line DVSA gives for the same row also names an inoperative lamp. The test covers only certain petrol vehicles, depending on their age, size and fuel type.

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

Lamps and electrical

Two faults. The strongest is the brake light: 2.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake light

Failed on 35 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

All stop lamps missing or not working is graded Dangerous, and so is a stop lamp that stays on when the brakes are released. A stop lamp that is missing or not working is Major. On some vehicles with LED rear lamps, part of the stop lamp can go out when the rear fog lamp is lit, which is not regarded as a defect.

Individual sidelight or tail light (front)

Failed on 38 first tests2.0 times as often as similar carsPossible 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.

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.

Suspension arm (front)

Noted on 29 first tests3.1 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Shock absorbers (rear)

Noted on 23 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Rigid brake pipes (front)

Noted on 52 first tests2.7 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Coil spring (front)

Noted on 28 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Rigid brake pipes (rear)

Noted on 57 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Flexible brake hoses (front)

Noted on 23 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Coil spring (rear)

Noted on 49 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension mounting area (rear)

Noted on 20 first tests2.1 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
49in 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
42in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 49.1% of 615 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 57.7%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 9 fixed and the 42 not fixed make the 51 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
2004 This car49 in every 100615
200547 in every 100744
200646 in every 100477

Newer cars are younger, so look for a jump rather than the climb. A year earlier (2024), when these cars were a year younger, 46 in every 100 passed first time.

FAQs

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

With 615 first tests, there are too few to say whether the 2004 Suzuki Alto differs from 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, 49.1% of 615 first MOTs on the 2004 Suzuki Alto passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 57.7%. Among 313 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear) appears more often than on similar cars (14.4% of those tests; 45 observed failures; about 7.3× 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 2004 Suzuki Alto at the first attempt were Drive shaft joints and boots (front) (16.9%) and Petrol engine warning light (16.6%), 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: Brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear) (14.4% of those tests; 45 observed failures; about 7.3× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (14.4% of those tests; 45 observed failures; about 7.3× 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 2004 Suzuki Alto include Brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear), Brake efficiency below minimum (roller test), 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 2004 Suzuki Alto (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