Suzuki Swift 2010: reliability & common MOT faults

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

Summary

The 2010 Suzuki Swift follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 5,486 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
56 in every 100
Did not pass first time
44 in every 1002,441 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
15 yearsabout 85,210 miles
First tests counted
5,486

What failed most often

  1. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)19 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Suspension arm ball joint (front)12 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)11 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 Suzuki Swift 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

Six faults. The strongest is the rigid brake pipes (rear): 4.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 2,441 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.

Rigid brake pipes (rear)

Failed on 159 first tests4.0 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 505 first tests, 4.8 times as often as on similar cars.

Rigid brake pipes (front)

Failed on 72 first tests3.3 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 320 first tests, 4.9 times as often as on similar cars.

Handbrake lever

Failed on 66 first tests3.3 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A parking brake lever pivot or ratchet mechanism that is obviously worn is graded Minor. It is Major when worn to the extent that the brake may inadvertently release, and also when the ratchet is not holding correctly. A lever must have obvious excessive travel before being rejected.

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

Failed on 86 first tests3.3 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 performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 163 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.

Handbrake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 64 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A parking brake that is inoperative on one side is Major. When tested on the road, the failure is the vehicle deviating excessively from a straight line. Vehicles whose parking brake was already tested as the secondary brake are not tested again for this.

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

One fault: coil spring (rear), 2.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Coil spring (rear)

Failed on 225 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsPossible 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

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.

Macpherson strut pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 103 first tests4.8 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

Coil spring (front)

Noted on 199 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Flexible brake hoses (rear)

Noted on 125 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

Brake pedal

Noted on 26 first tests2.8 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

Vehicle structure condition (rear)

Noted on 20 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 442 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
56in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
8in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
36in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 55.5% of 5,486 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 64.2%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 8 fixed and the 36 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.

4060801002005201020152020Older carsNewer cars
40608010020102020Newer cars

Newer cars are younger, so look for a jump rather than the climb.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200548 in every 1001,031
200650 in every 1003,181
200750 in every 1005,719
200851 in every 1006,147
200953 in every 1006,027
2010 This car56 in every 1005,486
201161 in every 1005,872
201264 in every 1008,590
201368 in every 1008,442
201471 in every 1009,785
201574 in every 10012,007
201676 in every 10010,122
201780 in every 1007,827
201884 in every 1009,830
201987 in every 10010,601
202088 in every 1007,762
202189 in every 1007,291
202293 in every 1004,340

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 Swift.

Of 2010 Swift vehicles with under 60,000 miles, 69 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 113,000 miles or more, 47 in every 100 did.

Under 60,0001,101 tests
69
60,000–78,0001,126 tests
56
78,000–94,000 Typical car1,099 tests
53
94,000–113,0001,067 tests
52
113,000 and over1,091 tests
47

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 60,00078,000–94,000113,000 and over
Individual sidelight or tail light (front)2.07.814.1
Suspension arm ball joint (front)2.55.97.4
Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)2.55.47.0
Coil spring (rear)2.54.54.7
Brake light (rear)1.94.74.7

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


When a car fails

26in every 100

of failed cars had one item to fix.

50in every 100

of failed cars had three or more items to fix.

9in 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 Suzuki Swift follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Individual sidelight or tail light (front), about 19 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 55.5% of 5,486 first MOTs on the 2010 Suzuki Swift passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 64.2%. Among 2,441 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Rigid brake pipes (rear) appears more often than on similar cars (6.5% of those tests; 159 observed failures; about 4.0× 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 Suzuki Swift at the first attempt were Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (19.0%), Suspension arm ball joint (front) (11.9%) and Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test) (11.2%), 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: Rigid brake pipes (rear) (6.5% of those tests; 159 observed failures; about 4.0× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Rigid brake pipes (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (6.5% of those tests; 159 observed failures; about 4.0× 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 Suzuki Swift include Rigid brake pipes (rear), Handbrake lever, Brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear). 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 Suzuki Swift (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