Model Reports 8 min read Updated 11 Sep 2026 DVSA open data · 1,002 tests analysed

Suzuki Wagon-R+ 2005: reliability & common MOT faults

418 first-attempt MOT failures were recorded on the 2005 Suzuki Wagon-R+ in 2025. Figures are among first-attempt failed MOT tests, not among all tests.

First-attempt pass rate 58.3% across 1,002 tests in 2025. Nothing in this year's figures separates it from the Wagon-R+ either side — no fuel gap, and no break in the model's own trend.

First-attempt pass

58.3%

of 1,002 first tests (2025)

First tests

1,002

test year 2025

Failed first attempts

418

failed first-attempt tests

MOT pass rates

First-attempt and official-style rates among class 4 first tests of the year.

First-attempt pass

58.3%

of 1,002 first tests (2025)

Official-style pass

64.4%

incl. same-day PRS fixes

First tests

1,002

class 4 · first MOT of the year

Typical age 20.0 yrs · median mileage 72,826 mi

vs 2024: +1.6 pp first-attempt

Note:

  • Class 4 cars · first MOT of the year per vehicle · P/PRS/F outcomes (2025 data).
  • PRS (fixed at the station the same day) counts as a fail in the first-attempt rate.
  • Raw outcomes for this cohort — not adjusted for age, mileage, or peer mix.
  • MOT doesn't test engine or gearbox internals.

Common faults

Failure patterns that show up more often on this registration year than on similar cars.

These MOT failure patterns show up more often on this registration year than on similar cars of the same class, age, and mileage.

Shares below are measured across the 417 of 418 failed first attempts (99.8%) that recorded an odometer reading in 2025 — the subset the age-and-mileage comparison can be computed on.

Standout: Wheel bearings (rear) — 7.9% of this year's failed first attempts

Recorded on 33 of those tests. It tops the table on elevation — about 5.2× more often than on similar cars of the same age and mileage. The full ranked list is in the table below.

No patterns met the strongest callout thresholds on this page; showing the highest-lift rows that still cleared the display floors.

Fault pattern Location Failures vs similar cars Share of fails Confidence
Wheel bearings (rear)
Suspension > Wheel bearings
 Rear 33 ×5.2 7.9% Likely
Track rod end (front)
Steering > Steering linkage components > Track rod end
 Front 41 ×2.6 9.8% Possible
Ball joint (front)
Suspension > Suspension arms > Ball joint
 Front 46 ×2.5 11.0% Possible
Rigid brake pipes (front)
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Front 21 ×2.5 5.0% Possible
Rigid brake pipes (rear)
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Rear 33 ×2.4 7.9% Possible
Ball joint dust cover (front)
Suspension > Suspension arms > Ball joint dust cover
 Front 20 ×2.1 4.8% Possible
Visibility — Wipers
Visibility > Wipers
 Any 38 ×2.0 9.1% Possible

Only patterns that clear minimum sample and elevation thresholds are shown (at least 20 failures and about 2.0× more often than similar cars).

Note: Rates and comparisons are among first-attempt failed tests, not all MOTs. Patterns come from MOT defect codes — not manufacturer service bulletins, recalls, or a diagnosis of any individual car. Failures and advisories are listed separately.

Advisories

Notes recorded at the test that appear more often than on similar cars.

Advisory notes recorded on failed first-attempt tests that appear more often than on similar cars.

Advisory pattern Location Notes vs similar cars Share Confidence
Suspension arm (rear)
Suspension > Suspension arms > Suspension arm
 Rear 24 ×2.6 5.8% Elevated
Non-component advisories (front)
Non-component advisories
 Front 53 ×2.5 12.7% Elevated
Rigid brake pipes (front)
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Front 59 ×2.3 14.1% Possible
Coil spring (front)
Suspension > Springs > Coil springs > Coil spring
 Front 33 ×2.2 7.9% Elevated
Registration plates (front)
Identification of the vehicle > Registration plates
 Front 34 ×2.1 8.2% Elevated
Note: Advisories are not a fail rate — they flag issues noted at the test, often before they become failures.

FAQs

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

Nothing in this year's figures separates it from the Wagon-R+ either side — no fuel gap, and no break in the model's own trend. In 2025, 58.3% of 1,002 first MOTs on the 2005 Suzuki Wagon-R+ passed first time (PRS — items fixed at the station the same day — counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 64.4%. Among 418 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Wheel bearings (rear) appears more…
Among failed first-attempt tests we highlight patterns that appear more often than on similar cars. Top example: Wheel bearings (rear) (7.9% of those tests; 33 observed failures; about 5.2× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Wheel bearings (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (7.9% of those tests; 33 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 check point, not a manufacturer service bulletin.
Common MOT problem areas for the 2005 Suzuki Wagon-R+ include Wheel bearings (rear), Track rod end (front), Ball joint (front). These patterns show up more often than on similar cars after we filter out sparse noise — not a full list of every possible fault on an 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 2005 Suzuki Wagon-R+ (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.
  • We never invent pass rates, star scores, or ranks when those data marts are missing.

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