MOT Risk Index.co.uk

Renault Grand Scenic — MOT statistics 2024

The Renault Grand Scenic failed 46.7% of 21,240 first MOT attempts in 2024 ("first-time", excluding retests). Adjusted for the age of the fleet, its initial-failure ratio is 135.7 (100 = expected for its age profile). This car fails its MOT about 36% more often than expected for its age.

MOT risk index 135.7, 95% CI 133.8–137.7 (100 = national average) 100 135.7 0 200
Index
135.7
100 = age-normal
Raw fail rate
46.7%
n = 21,240
Dangerous /100
19
national ≈11
Diesel − petrol
+1.5 pp
fail-rate gap
Rank
714 of 761
lower index = better

Age-adjusted peer: Renault Clio (index 136.1) — the two published results are 0.4 index points apart.

Renault Grand Scenic common problems: what actually fails the MOT

Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment stand out at 42.9 per 100 tests, against 21.4 per 100 tests across UK vehicles of the same ages.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

Renault Grand Scenic common problems: what actually fails the MOT — 2024 UK MOT data

family vs national — matched to UK vehicles of the same ages — top component groups, per 100 tests. Legend: This family · National avg. Combined labels: family / national average. A gap here reflects how these vehicles are driven, used and maintained as well as how they were built — an MOT defect is a test outcome, not a breakdown.

Component-group comparison table

Each ratio carries a 95% interval. With 6 groups compared here, roughly one apparent difference in twenty is chance alone.

GroupThis familyCases behind itUK, same agesFamily / national
Lamps & electrical42.975,46921.42.00×1.99–2.02
Suspension28.550,15419.31.48×1.47–1.49
Brakes19.534,23013.61.44×1.42–1.45
Tyres11.820,7129.81.21×1.19–1.22
Visibility11.620,3878.61.35×1.33–1.37
Steering11.119,5983.43.30×3.27–3.36
Named defects — items per 100 initial tests, this family vs UK national average; this model measured on 175,868 tests, 2019-2024, national column 2024
What failedper 100 tests (this family)per 100 tests (UK average)ratio family / UKWhat to check
Spring or spring component fractured or seriously…A spring or spring component fractured or seriously weakened11.152.863.90×Ask the seller about: A spring or spring component fractured or seriously weakened
Steering ball joint with excessive wear or free playA steering ball joint with excessive wear or free play8.311.226.79×Ask the seller about: A steering ball joint with excessive wear or free play
Suspension pin, bush or joint excessively wornA suspension pin, bush or joint excessively worn11.294.872.32×Listen for knocks over bumps — worn joints show up on the test
Lamp missing, inoperative or in the case of a…A lamp missing, inoperative or in the case of a multiple light source more than 1/2 not functioning6.822.093.27×Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure
Stop lamp missing, inoperative or in the case of…Stop lamp missing, inoperative or in the case of a multiple light source more than 1/2 not functioning5.521.503.68×Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure
Rear registration plate lamp or light source…A rear registration plate lamp or light source missing or inoperative in the case of multiple lamps or light sources5.862.832.07×Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure
Brake lining or pad worn below 1.5mma brake lining or pad worn below 1.5mm5.122.152.38×Feel for brake judder and pulling on the test drive
Transmission shaft constant velocity joint boot…A transmission shaft constant velocity joint boot missing or no longer prevents the ingress of dirt etc4.091.562.63×Ask the seller about: A transmission shaft constant velocity joint boot missing or
Tyre tread depth not in accordance with the…Tyre tread depth not in accordance with the requirements5.733.591.59×Check tyre tread depth across the full width
Aim of a headlamp is not within limits laid down…The aim of a headlamp is not within limits laid down in the requirements3.592.571.40×Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure

Named defects ranked by how much more often they appear than the national average — not by raw rate.

Renault Grand Scenic MOT advisories: what gets flagged

Brakes are highest at 55.2 per 100 tests; Steering is lowest at 6.5 per 100 tests — the gap is 48.7 per 100 tests.

higher bar = flagged more oftenadvisory items per 100 initial tests

Renault Grand Scenic MOT advisories: what gets flagged — 2024 UK MOT data
Advisory rates table
GroupAdvisories per 100
Brakes55.2
Tyres48.3
Suspension26.4
Non-component advisories22.4
Lamps & electrical7.3
Steering6.5

Advisories are wear the tester noted but didn't fail — what will need money soon.

Tyres, brakes and suspension: Renault Grand Scenic against cars of the same age

AgePartRenault Grand ScenicSame age, petrol and dieselDifference
3 yearsTyres7.614.173.44
3 yearsBrakes2.711.770.94
3 yearsSuspension2.20.631.57
4 yearsTyres6.264.541.72
4 yearsBrakes3.142.430.71
4 yearsSuspension2.491.211.28
5 yearsTyres6.995.061.93
5 yearsBrakes4.473.091.38
5 yearsSuspension3.472.191.28
6 yearsTyres7.035.541.49
6 yearsBrakes4.973.811.16
6 yearsSuspension5.243.721.52
7 yearsTyres7.415.951.46
7 yearsBrakes7.224.552.67
7 yearsSuspension8.535.682.85
8 yearsTyres7.716.311.40
8 yearsBrakes7.855.382.47
8 yearsSuspension13.357.785.57

Failing items per 100 initial tests, 2019-2024. The comparison group is every petrol or diesel car tested at the same age, so weight and drivetrain show up rather than fleet age.

If a car like this fails, does it fail again?

A failure rate does not say whether a failure is a one-off or the start of something. This follows the same vehicles into their next ordinary MOT a year later — retests after a repair are excluded, because they follow a failure by definition. 2019-2024.

After this year's testFails next yearVehicles followed
It failed45.3%14,181
It passed39.9%68,165

A failed test raises next year's chance of failing again by 5.4 percentage points. The failure most likely to come back is lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment — 41.7% of those vehicles fail again next year. Some of this is the vehicle and some is the owner: a car that was let go once tends to be let go again. One caveat: a car that fails may be sold or scrapped rather than tested again, so these figures describe the vehicles that came back.

Adjusted for how much these are actually driven

The headline index adjusts for the fleet's age. Wear, though, follows mileage: a three-year-old taxi and a three-year-old garage queen sit in the same age band. These two rows compare every car with vehicles of the same age, and then with vehicles of the same age and the same annual mileage, 2019-2024, on 174,035 tests. Both stand on the six-year corpus so they are measured on identical data — compare them with each other, not with the headline index above, which is measured on 2024 alone.

Standardised forIndexReading
Age only137.7fails more often than expected
Age and annual mileage133.0fails more often than vehicles driven as much
Share doing under 3,000 miles a year3.2%a normal spread of use

Mileage matters here: matching on how much these are driven moves the figure by 4.7 points — this fleet works harder than the vehicles it is measured against, so the age-only view penalises it — but it does not change which side of normal the car sits on. One limit to keep in mind: mileage is partly a result of how often a car breaks down — one that spends weeks in the workshop covers fewer miles — so the mileage-matched figure can understate a real weakness. Tests with no usable odometer reading are left out of it.

How the Renault Grand Scenic compares with cars of its own age and size

Not against the whole fleet — against cars of the same size class tested at the same age, 2019-2024.

AgeRenault Grand ScenicSame class, same ageDifferenceTests
3 years19.98%11.29%+8.69 pp4,679
4 years20.38%14.23%+6.15 pp5,858
5 years25.52%17.4%+8.11 pp6,309
6 years29.21%20.75%+8.46 pp5,957
7 years35.64%24.31%+11.33 pp7,276
8 years42.67%28.12%+14.54 pp11,606
9 years45.6%31.99%+13.61 pp16,613
10 years48.95%35.56%+13.4 pp16,867
11 years50.9%38.61%+12.29 pp18,789
12 years53.72%41.2%+12.52 pp21,241
13 years54.66%43.24%+11.42 pp20,750
14 years55.82%44.99%+10.83 pp17,868
15 years55.24%46.29%+8.95 pp10,052
16 years55.8%47.33%+8.47 pp6,090
17 years54.31%47.78%+6.53 pp3,454
18 years52.39%47.99%+4.4 pp1,567
19 years51.57%47.74%+3.84 pp572

Raw first-time failure rates within each age, so fleet age cannot flatter either side. A positive difference means this model fails more often than its own class at that age.

How does the Renault Grand Scenic perform as it gets older?

The Grand Scenic at age 11 stands out at 48.8%, against 33.2% for all vehicles of the same age.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

How does the Renault Grand Scenic perform as it gets older? — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart axes: car age, years · failure-rate scale 0–59%.

Takeaway: a 10-year-old Grand Scenic has roughly a 46% chance of failing its MOT; from about age 5 it stays above the national age curve.

Data table
AgeRenault Grand ScenicAll vehiclesGap
416.2%13.1%+3.1 pp
527.1%15.1%+12.0 pp
629.1%17.5%+11.6 pp
733.9%20.2%+13.7 pp
837.5%23.3%+14.1 pp
940.1%26.5%+13.6 pp
1045.6%30.1%+15.5 pp
1148.8%33.2%+15.7 pp
1249.4%35.7%+13.7 pp
1351.4%38.2%+13.3 pp
1452.2%40.4%+11.8 pp
1550.2%41.6%+8.6 pp
1654.1%43.1%+11.0 pp
1754.4%43.1%+11.3 pp
1851.0%43.9%+7.1 pp
1952.3%43.5%+8.8 pp

Is a Renault Grand Scenic ULEZ compliant?

The share of classifiable 2024 Renault Grand Scenic MOT tests likely ULEZ compliant by first-registration date is 41.2%.

Based on 21,112 classifiable initial MOT tests. This describes the tested fleet, not a specific car. MOT data do not record Euro class, so likely compliance is inferred from fuel and first-registration date. For the only authoritative answer, check the registration with TfL's official ULEZ checker.

higher = larger share likely compliantinferred from fuel and first-registration date; not a recorded Euro class

Age-band estimate from classifiable initial MOT tests
Vehicle age at testLikely ULEZ-compliant shareTests
Under 3 yearsSuppressed — sample below publication threshold
Check a registration with TfL
n = 0
3–5 years100.0%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 1,170
6–7 years100.0%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 1,708
8 years100.0%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 1,326
9 years50.8%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 1,410
10–14 years14.9%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 10,961
15–17 years50.4%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 3,352
18 years67.5%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 662
19 yearsSuppressed — sample below publication threshold
Check a registration with TfL
n = 452
20+ yearsSuppressed — sample below publication threshold
Check a registration with TfL
n = 71

How dangerous are Renault Grand Scenic MOT failures?

Major defects stand out at 103.4 per 100 tests, against 52.8 per 100 tests nationally.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

How dangerous are Renault Grand Scenic MOT failures? — 2024 UK MOT data
Severity table
SeverityThis family /100National /100Family / national
Minor18.9114.221.33×
Major103.4352.751.96×
Dangerous18.7111.151.68×

Chart values: Minor 18.9 · Major 103.4 · Dangerous 18.7.

Per 100 tests on this family. National average: Minor 14.2 · Major 52.8 · Dangerous 11.2 per 100.

Does the month of a Renault Grand Scenic MOT matter?

Feb is highest at 48.9%; Jun is lowest at 45.6% — the gap is 3.3 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Does the month of a Renault Grand Scenic MOT matter? — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart scale: 27%–50%.

bars: Renault Grand Scenic · dashed: all class-4 cars

Month-by-month table
MonthRenault Grand ScenicAll vehiclesGap
Jan48.61%31.12%+17.5 pp
Feb48.93%29.99%+18.9 pp
Mar47.11%28.26%+18.8 pp
Apr47.64%29.78%+17.9 pp
May46.34%28.79%+17.6 pp
Jun45.64%28.15%+17.5 pp
Jul46.42%29.33%+17.1 pp
Aug46.61%29.2%+17.4 pp
Sep47.06%28.19%+18.9 pp
Oct47.95%30.34%+17.6 pp
Nov48.33%30.58%+17.8 pp
Dec46.04%29.33%+16.7 pp

Takeaway: the spread between best and worst month is 3.3 percentage points — noticeable seasonality. Seasonality partly reflects registration-date clustering, not weather.

Before reading the shape: most of it is not about cars. Britain changes its registration plates twice a year, and 18.9% of these cars were first registered in March with another17.1% in September — 36% in two months against the 17% an even spread would give. An MOT falls due three years after first registration, so the buying calendar becomes the testing calendar. That shapes how many cars are tested each month — not how often they fail: the busiest months here are not the worst ones, so read the failure line on its own and the volume behind it separately.

Renault Grand Scenic average mileage by age

At age 8, the middle half of Grand Scenics runs from 53,384 miles to 88,124 miles, against 69,842 miles as the median.

further right = more milesmedian is the typical car; band is p25–p75

Bars: Renault Grand Scenic · dashed: all class-4 cars — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart axes: car age, years · odometer scale 0–145k mi.

Does high mileage mean more Renault Grand Scenic MOT failures at the same age?

Within the same age group, split by odometer (2024 MOTs), so this separates wear from age: at ages 10–14, 30.2% of those with under 40,000 miles failed first time versus 54% of those with over 140,000 miles.Inside this age group, higher mileage goes with more failures.

Does high mileage mean more Renault Grand Scenic MOT failures at the same age? — 2024 UK MOT data
Renault Grand Scenic: first-time failure by mileage within each age group (2024)
AgeOdometer% failing95% intervalTests
3–5<40k miles18.9%16.2–21.9%715
3–540-70k miles32.4%28.1–37.1%413 (rough estimate)
6–9<40k miles22.6%19.5–26%628
6–940-70k miles35.1%33.1–37.2%1,993
6–970-100k miles42.6%39.9–45.3%1,263
6–9100-140k miles42%37.7–46.5%471 (rough estimate)
6–9140k+ miles33.6%26.2–41.8%137 (rough estimate)
10–14<40k miles30.2%22.6–39.1%116 (rough estimate)
10–1440-70k miles43.4%40.6–46.3%1,137
10–1470-100k miles49.8%48.2–51.4%3,548
10–14100-140k miles52.7%51.3–54.2%4,517
10–14140k+ miles54%51.5–56.4%1,564
15+<40k miles34.4%26.6–43.2%122 (rough estimate)
15+40-70k miles48.3%44.2–52.4%569
15+70-100k miles50.9%48.1–53.6%1,262
15+100-140k miles54.2%51.8–56.5%1,748
15+140k+ miles57.5%54–61%772

line: median · band: middle half of the fleet (p25–p75)

Mileage by age (p25 / median / p75)
Agep25Medianp75Tests
419,67028,02942,062265
527,69736,93547,844903
638,37449,41765,454656
743,98757,22473,1851,104
853,38469,84288,1241,326
957,65272,83194,3621,410
1068,19187,250108,824877
1173,66091,453115,274508
1281,47998,806119,9941,532
1385,618103,771123,4513,787
1492,014111,809132,8794,257
1593,672114,330138,1181,227
1686,278106,026128,9331,064
1787,038106,904130,3211,066
1882,888103,983127,852663
1950,74970,502100,913453

A typical 8-year-old Grand Scenic has ~69,842 miles on the clock. Much more — ask why; much less — check for gaps in the MOT history.

Where in Britain the Renault Grand Scenic fails its MOT most

Kirkcaldy area is highest at 64.5%; Bromley area is lowest at 32.4% — the gap is 32.2 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Where in Britain the Renault Grand Scenic fails its MOT most — 2024 UK MOT data
Toughest areas% failingvs model overall
Kirkcaldy (KY)64.5%+17.2 pp
Dundee (DD)60.77%+13.5 pp
Hull (HU)59.47%+12.2 pp
Taunton (TA)57.3%+10.0 pp
Perth (PH)56.94%+9.6 pp
Easiest areas% failingvs model overall
Bromley (BR)32.35%-15.0 pp
Enfield (EN)34.5%-12.8 pp
Twickenham (TW)36.11%-11.2 pp
Romford (RM)36.59%-10.7 pp
Croydon (CR)37.06%-10.3 pp

Why do areas differ?

For each external factor we correlate the area fail rate with the factor across postcode areas that have ≥800 tests of this family, then compare the bottom vs top fifth (quintile) of the factor. Correlation, not causation — factors travel together (the north is colder and often poorer; urban areas are denser and less salted). Road surface condition is joined now, for the 91 English areas the DfT publishes, and it explains nothing: the correlation with suspension failures is −0.01 and with body and structure failures 0.07. Potholes wreck wheels and tyres between tests, but by the time a car reaches the bay the road it drives on leaves no measurable trace.

In areas with the highest mot centre density this model fails 13.8 pp more often than in the lowest fifth (r=0.80, n=88 areas with ≥800 tests).

In areas with the highest urban share this model fails 10.7 pp less often than in the lowest fifth (r=-0.54, n=88 areas with ≥800 tests).

In areas with the highest frost days this model fails 5.6 pp more often than in the lowest fifth (r=0.42, n=88 areas with ≥800 tests).

Renault Grand Scenic Why do areas differ? — 2024 UK MOT data
Values shown in the quintile chart
FactorLow QHigh QGapCorrelation
MOT centre density39.4%53.2%+13.8 ppr=0.80
Urban share51.0%40.3%-10.7 ppr=-0.54
Frost days44.6%50.2%+5.6 ppr=0.42

Factors that only mean something combined

Some conditions are useless on their own and informative multiplied together. Frost days alone say little — Britain barely freezes. Salt tonnage alone says little — it tracks frost. Distance to the sea alone says little. Multiply the first two and divide by the third and you get an index of how hard an area attacks a car's underside, and it lines up with the corrosion defects we actually record. We built five such combinations and tested each against our own data. Three survived; two did not, and the failures are listed here on purpose — a proxy that was never checked is decoration. One survivor only survived on the second attempt: built from a crude stand-in for street parking it failed outright, and rebuilt from the census — terraced streets carrying more cars than they have driveways — it works, and carries information the salt index does not.

Composite area indicators, each tested against a defect rate we measure
CompositeBuilt fromTested againstrVerdict
Underbody corrosionfrost days × salt load ÷ (distance to coast + 1)share of tests with a corrosion defect+0.42holds (116 areas)
Tyre wearrain days × annual miles ÷ age at first tyre advisoryshare of tests failing on tyres+0.45holds (116 areas)
Overnight corrosionterraced housing × cars per household × frost daysshare with a corrosion defect+0.41holds (102 areas) — and adds signal beyond the first index
Deferred maintenancedeprivation × advisory-to-failure conversion ÷ labour ratecars repeating the same advisory−0.26fails (118 areas)
Powertrain stressengine capacity ÷ kerb weightsuspension, brake and emissions failures−0.16fails (22 models)

The deprivation result is the one worth dwelling on. The intuition that poorer areas defer repairs is strong enough that most people treat it as established. We tested it twice — once on raw failure rates (r = 0.04) and again, more fairly, on whether an advisory turns into a failure — and it did not hold any of the three times we tried it — on raw failure rates, on advisory-to-failure conversion, and again with deprivation measured properly inside each nation rather than England alone. We are closing it. What does predict local failure rates is the density of test centres, which is a statement about testing, not about cars.

All external-factor correlations (machine-readable)
Factorrn areasLow-Q fail %High-Q fail %Gap ppLow-Q factorHigh-Q factor
MOT centre density (per 10k vehicles)0.8038839.453.2+13.858.1
Urban share (0–1)-0.5378851.040.3-10.70.51
Frost days (days/year)0.4248844.650.2+5.610.930.8
Road-salt proxy (g/m²-yr)0.4168843.750.5+6.8214.2543.5
Distance to coast (km)-0.2668851.046.3-4.77.282.9
Terrain gradient (% grade)0.1554949.550.5+1.00.43.3
Income deprivation (score)0.0538145.246.7+1.50.10.2

Deprivation uses England IMD 2019 income score only (Scotland SIMD is a different scale). Salt proxy is a simplified NWSRG-style dry-salt sum from air Tmin; coastalness is distance from the area centroid to the nearest coastline.

Every dot is a postcode area — size = how many were tested there, colour = share failing. These figures are not age-adjusted: coastal and rural areas often run older fleets and salted roads, so higher raw fail rates do not automatically mean a worse local stock of this model.

Map labels: Scotland · N. England · Wales · London · S. West. Colour scale: 38%–57% failing.

Renault Grand Scenic survival: which cars are still on the road

By age 19 is well below the reference at 9.5%, against 100.0% at the ages 4–6 reference level.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Renault Grand Scenic survival: which cars are still on the road — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart axes: car age, years · survival vs ages 4–6 · scale 0–105%.

Survival vs fail rate by age
AgeTestsSurvival vs ages 4–6Fail %
34,67977.4%19.98%
45,85897%20.38%
56,309100%25.52%
65,95798.6%29.21%
77,276100%35.64%
811,606100%42.67%
916,613100%45.6%
1016,867100%48.95%
1118,789100%50.9%
1221,241100%53.72%
1320,750100%54.66%
1417,868100%55.82%
1510,052100%55.24%
166,090100%55.8%
173,45457.2%54.31%
181,56725.9%52.39%
195729.5%51.57%

By age 19, only about 10% as many cars of this family present for MOT as at ages 4–6 (reference n≈6,041); survivors still fail at 51.6% vs 20.4% at age 4. Older cars that still appear are a selected subset — weaker ones have already left.

How many miles does a Renault Grand Scenic last?

100,000+ miles is highest at 34.2%; 200,000+ miles is lowest at 0.5% — the gap is 33.7 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

OdometerTests ≥ thresholdShare of sample
100,000+ miles59,45334.15%
150,000+ miles8,6714.98%
200,000+ miles8310.48%

Of 174,104 tests of this family with a usable odometer in 2024, 34.1% had reached 100k miles, 5.0% had reached 150k miles, 0.5% had reached 200k miles. This is a cross-section of cars still presenting for MOT, not a full birth cohort.

How many years is a Renault Grand Scenic likely to last?

Bought at age 5 is highest at 12.4 years; Bought at age 15 is lowest at 2.4 years — the gap is 10.0 years.

bigger number = longer remaining lifeyears on the observed survival curve

Age nowTypical mileage (p50)Expected years left
5—12.4
8—9.4
10—7.4
12—5.4
15—at least 2.4

estimateEstimate only — not a warranty: a typical 10-year-old example of this family has about 7.4 expected years of further MOT-present life on the 2024 survival curve. Derived from how many cars of each age still appear for test, not from a longitudinal panel.

Renault Grand Scenic faults that come together

Identification + Seatbelts & SRS stand out at 4.13×, against 1.00× if the faults were independent.

above 1.0× = more than expectedbelow 1.0× = less

Group AGroup BTogetherLift
Identification of the vehicleSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems354.13× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems3593.66× (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleNoise, emissions and leaks703.63× (rough estimate)
Road WheelsSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems373.61× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksRoad Wheels753.22× (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleTyres1352.93× (rough estimate)
BrakesSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems9032.9×
Body, chassis, structureSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems5832.84×
BrakesIdentification of the vehicle1742.84× (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleVisibility1482.84× (rough estimate)
BrakesNoise, emissions and leaks1,9072.69×
Identification of the vehicleLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment3462.67× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureIdentification of the vehicle1082.67× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems1,7482.66×
Road WheelsSteering1522.53× (rough estimate)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsVisibility6632.51×
Body, chassis, structureBrakes3,6742.47×
BrakesSteering4,4592.44×
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentNoise, emissions and leaks3,6272.42×
Identification of the vehicleSteering1202.41× (rough estimate)
BrakesTyres4,0452.39×
Body, chassis, structureNoise, emissions and leaks1,1052.36×
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsSteering5952.36×
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentRoad Wheels3672.34× (rough estimate)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsSuspension1,2462.33×
SteeringSuspension7,2542.31×
Road WheelsTyres1282.3× (rough estimate)
BrakesSuspension8,8742.29×
Road WheelsSuspension2922.29× (rough estimate)
BrakesRoad Wheels1692.28× (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleSuspension2392.27× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksSteering1,2972.26×
BrakesLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment10,7182.25×
Noise, emissions and leaksTyres1,2002.25×
Noise, emissions and leaksVisibility1,3372.22×
Body, chassis, structureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment6,8962.2×
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsTyres5162.2×
Body, chassis, structureSteering2,6222.18×
Road WheelsVisibility1372.18× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksSuspension2,6272.16×
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSteering8,3002.15×
SteeringTyres2,9362.14×
Body, chassis, structureSuspension5,4562.13×
Body, chassis, structureRoad Wheels1042.13× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentTyres7,5652.11×
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentVisibility8,4722.1×
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSuspension17,0862.09×
TyresVisibility2,9482.05×
BrakesVisibility3,8642.02×
SuspensionTyres5,7231.96×
Body, chassis, structureVisibility2,4641.95×
Body, chassis, structureTyres2,1471.92×
SuspensionVisibility5,9231.8×
SteeringVisibility2,7571.78×
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSeat belt installation check17too few (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSpeedometer and speed limiter11too few (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleRoad Wheels10too few (rough estimate)
BrakesSeat belt installation check9too few (rough estimate)
BrakesSpeedometer and speed limiter8too few (rough estimate)
Seat belt installation checkVisibility7too few (rough estimate)
Seat belt installation checkSuspension7too few (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksSpeedometer and speed limiter5too few (rough estimate)
Seat belt installation checkSteering5too few (rough estimate)

Defects in «Brakes» and «Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems» appear together 2.90× more often than chance (903 co-occurrences in the same test; lift≥1.3, n≥500).

Lift = how many times more often both groups appear on the same test than if independent. A pair is listed from 5 tests with both faults; the lift is shown from 20, and called above chance only when its 95% interval excludes 1 (see rough estimates).

Is low mileage better for a Renault Grand Scenic?

Cars driven under 5,000 miles a year is well below the reference at 39.5%, against 50.9% for cars driven 8,000–12,000 miles a year.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

BandFail %Tests
<5k miles/year39.46%13,137
8–12k miles/year50.86%60,305
Gap (low − normal)-11.39 pp—
By fuel and age

Diesel

AgeLow-use fail %nNormal fail %nGap pp
513.8862726.441,838-12.57 pp
618.9157131.142,065-12.22 pp
717.3757037.482,748-20.11 pp
827.0162244.94,443-17.89 pp
929.8876348.626,728-18.74 pp
1036.5269050.776,790-14.24 pp
1136.8769752.886,796-16.01 pp
1239.373855.017,048-15.71 pp
1344.7476055.266,113-10.52 pp
1452.431,07256.133,706-3.7 pp

Petrol

AgeLow-use fail %nNormal fail %nGap pp
517.922930.13302-12.23 pp
617.288127.5598-10.27 pp
717.288140.54185-23.26 pp
840.5910150.59589-10 pp
934.7816149.14989-14.36 pp
1033.0624852.561,212-19.49 pp
1141.1644756.561,922-15.39 pp
1241.8271559.92,459-18.08 pp
1347.081,04559.272,497-12.19 pp
1453.822,91760.511,722-6.69 pp

At matched ages 5–14, cars averaging under 5k miles/year fail at 39.5% vs 50.9% for 8–12k miles/year — 11.4 pp lower (n_low=13,137, n_normal=60,305). In this family low annual use is associated with fewer MOT fails, not more — the ‘garage queen’ penalty is not visible in overall fail rates. Diesel alone: 33.6% low-use vs 47.2% normal (-13.5 pp).

Which Renault Grand Scenic engine is best?

petrol 1.5–1.8 is highest at 104.9; petrol 1.0–1.2 is lowest at 82.6 — the gap is 22.3 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

Engine bands against this model's own failure rate at the same ages
FuelCapacityvs own age normRaw fail %Tests
petrol1.0–1.2 litre82.623.34%1,148 (rough estimate)
petrol1.2–1.5 litre94.834.65%6,029
diesel1.5–1.8 litre95.535.35%13,569
petrol1.8–2.0 litre97.152.72%13,372
diesel1.2–1.5 litre99.145.05%88,134
diesel1.8–2.0 litre100.853.18%19,835
petrol1.5–1.8 litre104.955.7%33,365

Splitting this model by fuel alone hides the thing that actually differs. Within the same badge, the petrol 1.5–1.8 runs at 104.9 against this model's own age norm while the petrol 1.2–1.5 runs at 94.8 — a spread of 10.1 points between two cars that share a name.

Read this one with more care than the rest of the page. Age is held constant, but who buys which engine is not: the largest capacity in a range is often a performance or executive variant that is garaged, cherished and lightly driven, while the smallest is frequently a fleet or entry car worked hard from new. The gap below is real in the test records; how much of it is the engine and how much is the owner, this data cannot separate. Bands under 100 tests are not shown; bands under 5,000 tests are rough estimates.

Best year for a Renault Grand Scenic, and the years to avoid

Build year 2019 is highest at 113.8; Build year 2015 is lowest at 90.5 — the gap is 23.3 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

build year vs the same model at the same age · 100 = as expected

Renault Grand Scenic build year vs the same model at the same age · 100 = as expected — 2024 UK MOT data
Renault Grand Scenic by build year, tests 2019–2024. Below 100 is better than the model's own age norm.
Every build year with its confidence interval
Build yearvs own age norm95% CIRaw fail %TestsVerdict
20209879–117.119.21%531no different
2019113.8105.1–122.524.23%2,711worse
2018108.4100.2–116.525.04%2,732worse
201797.692.5–102.624.78%5,774no different
201691.687.7–95.526.1%8,166better
201590.587–9429.64%8,711better
2014100.496–104.937.95%5,251no different
201398.893.5–104.141.2%3,274no different
2012100.697.8–103.446%10,568no different
201198.897.1–100.448.36%28,944no different
20109896.5–99.450.2%33,841better
20099693.5–98.650.94%11,034better
2008102.199.8–104.555.62%13,147no different
2007103100.9–105.257.45%15,688worse
2006100.197.7–102.556.38%11,944no different
2005101.498.9–103.957.73%11,300no different
2004102.696.4–108.758.13%1,858no different

The best build year here is 2015 and the weakest is 2007. Comparing build years sounds simple and is not: within a single year of testing, a car's build year and its age are the same number, so a naive comparison of years is a comparison of ages wearing a disguise. Each year below is measured against the same model at the same age in other cohorts, across six years of testing — 5 of 17 years come out distinguishable from their own model's age norm.

Two limits worth knowing before you act on this. Age, test year and build year are locked together by arithmetic, so the test-year effect is taken from the observed national failure level of each year rather than estimated — it is an adjustment, not a solution.

Renault Grand Scenic MOT repair costs

The MOT-failure repair budget per test runs from £151.23 to £287.34, against £54.85 for the test itself.

bigger number = costs morepounds per test, MOT-failing faults only

MOT repairs, budget
£151–287
per test, repairs only
The test itself
£54.85
statutory cap, unchanged since 2010
How the figure is built: chance of failing × typical price of that repair
ComponentFails per 100 testsTypical repairIts priceContribution
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment42.9 (nat. 18.09)Battery replacement (standard 12V lead-acid)£140£60.06
Suspension28.5 (nat. 15.36)Suspension coil spring (single corner)£180£51.30
Brakes19.5 (nat. 11.25)Front brake pads (parts + labour, typical hatchback)£150£29.25
Tyres11.8 (nat. 8.7)Tyre (single mid-range 16" fitted)£90£10.62

Multiply how often each component fails on this model by what that repair usually costs, and you get the amount an owner should expect to budget per test for MOT-failing faults only — roughly £151 to £287, on top of the test fee itself. It is a budgeting figure, not a quote: the spread between a set of pads and a set of discs is most of the range.

Prices are modal quotes from a hand-kept catalogue of published UK garage guides — we do not scrape the booking sites, their terms forbid it, so this list is short and updated by hand with a source and date against each line. Each line prices one typical repair in that group, not a full remedy, and only groups our catalogue actually covers are counted. The contrast worth noticing is the second card: the legal maximum for the test has been £54.85 since 2010, while the repairs it uncovers have followed inflation the whole time.

For scale from a different direction: Warrantywise, which sees used-car warranty claims rather than test failures, puts the average claim at £2,052 across the ten highest-claim models it ranks and £539 for Honda, the lowest-claim make in its index (Warrantywise index 2026, 1.6 million claims, cars aged 3–15). Those sit an order of magnitude above the figures in this table, and the gap is the point: a warranty claim is a gearbox or an engine, which almost never fails an MOT, while the faults that do fail one are corrosion, lamps and tyres, which no warranty pays for. The two numbers answer different questions and neither replaces the other.

Renault Grand Scenic running costs for a fleet

Vehicles failing at age 10 stand out at 46.0%, against 27.0% at age 5, tested in the same year.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Fails per 100 at age 5
27
vehicles needing work (rough estimate: 903 tests)
At age 10
46
other cars of this model tested at age 10 in 2024 (rough estimate: 877 tests)
Repairs per 100
£15,123
plus £5,485 in test fees
Off the road
1d
median; 39.56% cleared same day
Failure rate and typical odometer by age
AgeFailsMedian odometerTestsGap vs age 5
416.23%28,029265-10.9 pp
527.13%36,935903+0.0 pp
629.12%49,417656+2.0 pp
733.88%57,2241,104+6.8 pp
837.48%69,8421,326+10.3 pp
940.14%72,8311,410+13.0 pp
1045.61%87,250877+18.5 pp
1148.82%91,453508+21.7 pp
1249.41%98,8061,532+22.3 pp
1351.44%103,7713,787+24.3 pp
1452.24%111,8094,257+25.1 pp
1550.2%114,3301,227+23.1 pp
1654.14%106,0261,064+27.0 pp
1754.41%106,9041,066+27.3 pp
1850.98%103,983663+23.8 pp
1952.32%70,502453+25.2 pp

No single year stands out as the point where this model starts costing more: the year-to-year steps in its failure rate are too small or rest on too few tests to name one (D1 rule: a step is named only with at least 2,000 tests on both sides and a jump above 3 percentage points).

Repair spend uses the same modal prices as the section above, so it inherits the same limits: one typical repair per component group, not a full remedy. Downtime is the gap between the failed test and the passed re-test, which is the window a vehicle is legally off the road.

Renault Grand Scenic rust problems: where they corrode

Age-standardised corrosion susceptibility stands out at 1.09×, against 1.00× for the national age-standardised rate.

above 1.0× = rusts more than averagebelow 1.0× = rusts less

How it rusts
1.09×
0.83% of tests record a corrosion defect vs 0.77% typical — age-standardised
Salt Belt exposure
44th
percentile among the models published here, from its tests across 88 postcode areas

This Renault Grand Scenic fails on corrosion at about the average rate once age is held constant, and its owners live in areas that are about typical for the models we publish.

Corrosion is the one failure mode that is as much about geography as about the car. We keep the two apart on purpose: a model can look rusty simply because it is popular in Scotland, and a model can look clean simply because it is bought in Surrey. Blending them into a single score would hide which of the two is doing the work.

Exposure is this model's tests weighted by an area corrosion index built from frost days, salt load and distance to the coast — the composite validated at r = 0.42 against corrosion defects we actually record. It is published as a rank, not a raw score, because every mainstream model skews towards low-corrosion areas for the simple reason that most of Britain's cars are in the south. Susceptibility is standardised to the national age profile, so an old fleet does not get labelled a rusty model.

Does a Renault Grand Scenic advisory become a failure?

Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment are highest at 36.3%; Road wheels are lowest at 1.5% — the gap is 34.9 percentage points.

higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability

chance the same component fails at the next MOT, given an advisory now

Renault Grand Scenic chance the same component fails at the next MOT, given an advisory now — 2024 UK MOT data
Renault Grand Scenic, advisory → failure conversion by component group, chained tests 2019–2024. Chart labels and rates: Lamps & electrical 36.3% · Suspension 26.8% · Steering 23.2% · Body & chassis 17.8% · Brakes 16.4% · Tyres 10.9% · Noise, emissions, leaks 7.2% · Seat belts & restraints 4%.
Advisory today → failure at the next test, with how long you have
ComponentFails next timeTypical lead timeMiles of warningAdvisories tracked
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment36.3%12 months5,9605,921
Suspension26.8%12 months6,72621,894
Steering23.2%12 months6,7066,760
Body, chassis, structure17.8%12.1 months5,9302,589
Brakes16.4%12 months6,31438,697
Tyres10.9%12 months6,64038,740
Noise, emissions and leaks7.2%12.1 months5,8365,168
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems4.0%12.2 months7,7501,572
Identification of the vehicle3.9%12 months6,6972,699
Road wheels1.5%12 months7,3421,490

This is the question an advisory note actually raises, and it needs six years of test history to answer. We followed the same vehicles from one MOT to the next across 2019–2024 and measured how often a component that was merely advised came back as a genuine failure at the next test.

Read it as a budgeting horizon, not a prophecy: the most likely component above turns into a failure for about 36 in 100 cars, and the median gap is 12 months and roughly 5,960 miles. The rest were repaired, sold, scrapped, or simply held. Rows with fewer than 500 tracked advisories are not shown.

What will fail next on a Renault Grand Scenic?

Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment after a failure at age 15-19 are highest at 40.8%; Visibility after a passed at age <3 is lowest at 2.8% — the gap is 37.9 percentage points.

higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability

Probability of each component failing at the next test, by age and last result
AgeLast testMost likely next failuresCars tracked
<3passedTyres 5.2% · Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 4.4% · Visibility 2.8%2,049
<3advisoryTyres 6.9% · Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 5.8% · Suspension 3.9%917
<3failureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 8.7% · Tyres 8.1% · Brakes 4.1%665
3-5passedLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 6.9% · Tyres 5.5% · Visibility 4.5%7,329
3-5advisoryLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 9.1% · Tyres 7.9% · Visibility 6.5%4,398
3-5failureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 13.0% · Tyres 9.0% · Visibility 7.2%3,640
6-8passedLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 14.0% · Suspension 11.6% · Visibility 7.0%8,182
6-8advisoryLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 16.7% · Suspension 14.5% · Visibility 9.1%7,599
6-8failureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 22.1% · Suspension 19.2% · Brakes 10.8%10,877
9-11passedLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 18.6% · Suspension 18.0% · Steering 8.7%10,656
9-11advisoryLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 23.4% · Suspension 21.9% · Steering 11.0%13,077
9-11failureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 29.1% · Suspension 25.3% · Brakes 13.2%23,509
12-14passedLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 22.2% · Suspension 19.7% · Brakes 9.5%5,938
12-14advisoryLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 30.9% · Suspension 24.5% · Brakes 13.4%9,543
12-14failureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 36.8% · Suspension 28.0% · Brakes 17.5%18,148
15-19passedLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 23.7% · Suspension 19.5% · Brakes 12.3%1,249
15-19advisoryLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 31.9% · Suspension 24.8% · Brakes 14.2%2,683
15-19failureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 40.8% · Suspension 28.9% · Brakes 17.8%4,565

The same chains, cut differently: given a car's age and how its last test went, which component most often causes trouble at the following one.

The pattern that repeats across every family: a failure at one test roughly doubles the chance of a failure on the same component at the next one, and an advisory sits about half-way between a clean pass and a failure. Age bands in years; probabilities are per car, not per defect item.

Renault Grand Scenic ownership: what six years of MOTs show

The ten-day re-test pass rate is highest at 57.1%; The later re-test pass rate is lowest at 3.3% — the gap is 53.8 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Fixed same day
39.56%
of failures re-tested
Fails /10k miles
0.662
miles actually driven
Clean streaks
19.68%
3+ tests, nothing noted
Odometer anomaly
1.146%
reading went backwards

Failing is usually a same-week event, not a disaster. Of 62,280 failures followed through to their re-test, 39.56% were repaired and passed the same day and 57.11% within ten days; the median gap is 1 day. 187,078 defect items were cleared in the process.

Per mile driven, not per year. Dividing failures by the miles that actually went onto the odometers between consecutive tests gives 0.662 failures per 10,000 miles, on a median of 6,086 miles a year across 35,345 chains. This is the number to compare between models — an annual rate quietly rewards cars that barely leave the drive.

Two populations hide inside one model. 19.68% of these cars strung together three or more tests with nothing recorded at all, while 44.17% carried the same advisory three times or more — the same fault, noted, ignored, noted again. When you buy used you are buying one of those two histories, and the MOT record shows which.

Odometer anomalies: 1.146% of 35,418 chains show a reading lower than the previous test, with a median drop of 17,505 miles. We call this an anomaly and not fraud on purpose — instrument swaps, imports, unit mix-ups and keying errors all land in the same bucket. Obvious typos (drops under 100 miles or over 90% of the reading) are already excluded.

Renault Grand Scenic MOT: quick answers

Renault Grand Scenic MOT Risk Index stands out at 135.7, against 100 for a car with the same age profile.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

What is the Renault Grand Scenic first-time MOT pass rate?
53.3% of first attempts passed in 2024 (21,240 tests). This is the first-time figure: retests after repair are excluded. Basis: first-time, excluding retests.
Why does this number differ from other sites?
Other sites often report a pass rate that includes retests or counts all attempts. Our 46.7% figure is the first-time initial failure rate, using 21,240 primary tests as the denominator (first-time, excluding retests). The age-adjusted MOT initial-failure ratio 135.7 is shown separately because raw rates compare fleet age as well as cars.

Compare the Renault Grand Scenic with other cars

Renault Zoe is highest at 136.3; Vauxhall Antara is lowest at 135.0 — the gap is 1.3 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

Same brand

All Renault MOT statisticsRenault Clio MOT statsRenault Zoe MOT stats

Similar risk

Renault Clio (index 136.1)Renault Zoe (index 136.3)Vauxhall Antara (index 135.0)

Same size class

how Toyota Land Cruiser compareshow Citroen C4 Cactus compareshow Mercedes-Benz SL compares

By build year

Renault Grand Scenic 2004Renault Grand Scenic 2005Renault Grand Scenic 2006Renault Grand Scenic 2007Renault Grand Scenic 2008Renault Grand Scenic 2009Renault Grand Scenic 2010Renault Grand Scenic 2011Renault Grand Scenic 2012Renault Grand Scenic 2013Renault Grand Scenic 2014Renault Grand Scenic 2015Renault Grand Scenic 2016Renault Grand Scenic 2017Renault Grand Scenic 2018Renault Grand Scenic 2019Renault Grand Scenic 2020

By area

Renault Grand Scenic MOT failure rate by postcode area

By failure group

Renault Grand Scenic body, chassis and structure failuresRenault Grand Scenic brakes failuresRenault Grand Scenic vehicle identification failuresRenault Grand Scenic lamps, reflectors and electrics failuresRenault Grand Scenic noise, emissions and leaks failuresRenault Grand Scenic road wheels failuresRenault Grand Scenic seat belts and airbags failuresRenault Grand Scenic steering failuresRenault Grand Scenic suspension failuresRenault Grand Scenic tyres failuresRenault Grand Scenic visibility failures


Data details & how to cite

Scope: class-4 vehicles (cars), initial tests only, outcomes pass / fail / fixed-on-the-spot at the station (PRS counts towards the failure rate — the defect was present at arrival). Index = observed initial failures ÷ failures expected for this fleet's exact age profile, ×100; margin of error is a 95% confidence interval. Covers ALL generations together — a 3-year-old and a 15-year-old are very different cars; a generation split is on the roadmap. Dataset release dataset_release_id=dvsa-2024-v2, frozen baseline; headline claim_id=family-stats:renault-grand-scenic:dvsa-2024-v2. Full method: methodology.

Cite: MOT Risk Index (2026). Renault Grand Scenic MOT statistics 2024 (data release dvsa-2024-v2; downloadable dataset motriskindex-families-2024-v5, doi:10.5281/zenodo.22975051). https://motriskindex.co.uk/cars/renault-grand-scenic/ · Published 2026-07-30.