MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Citroen » C5 » 2010

Citroen C5 MOT Results

Registered in 2010
58.8% pass rate
from 1,816 tests in 2021
(11% worse than other 2010 cars)
Pass rate by mileage
More MoT Results
Failure rates by item

Here you can drill down into the failure rates for each item on the test. We've also compared the rates to the average results for 2010 cars and highlighted areas where the Citroen C5 is unusually good or bad.

  • 14% fail on Body, chassis, structure (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 13% fail on Transmission (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 12% fail on Drive shafts (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 12% fail on Joints (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.50% fail on Prop shafts (6 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.50% fail on Joints (8 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.28% fail on Exhaust system (84% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.22% fail on Engine mounting (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.17% fail on Engine mounting condition (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.055% fail on Bracket
    • 0.17% fail on Body
      • 0.17% fail on Other body component
    • 0.11% fail on Undertray
    • 0.055% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.055% fail on Tank
    • 0.055% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.055% fail on Seats
      • 0.055% fail on Passenger's seat
    • 0.055% fail on Passenger compartment
  • 13% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 4.7% fail on Stop lamp (62% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.3% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.2% fail on Headlamp
      • 0.11% fail on Headlamp levelling device
    • 3.2% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 2.6% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.61% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 2.9% fail on Registration plate lamp(s) (46% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.39% fail on Direction indicators (81% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.39% fail on Flashing type (81% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.22% fail on Individual direction indicators (83% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.11% fail on Side repeaters (85% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.055% fail on All direction indicators
    • 0.39% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.11% fail on Electrical wiring
      • 0.11% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.11% fail on Horn
      • 0.055% fail on Trailer electrical socket
    • 0.28% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 0.28% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.28% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.17% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.17% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.11% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.11% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.055% fail on Rear reflectors
  • 12% fail on Suspension
    • 5.7% fail on Suspension arms (38% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 4.7% fail on Pins and bushes (180% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.3% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.11% fail on Suspension arm
    • 3.5% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 2.2% fail on Linkage ball joints (98% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.72% fail on Ball joint (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.39% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover (67% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Anti-roll bar
      • 0.11% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.055% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
    • 1.4% fail on Springs (74% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Coil springs (74% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.4% fail on Coil spring (74% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.2% fail on Other suspension component (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.61% fail on Ball joint (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.44% fail on Pins and bushes (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting (11 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.055% fail on Other suspension component
    • 0.94% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 0.83% fail on Air/gas/fluid suspension (64 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.55% fail on Suspension unit (155 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.22% fail on Pipes (110 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.055% fail on Accumulator
    • 0.39% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.22% fail on Axles
      • 0.22% fail on Swivel pins and bushes
    • 0.055% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.055% fail on Pins and bushes
    • 0.055% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.055% fail on Ball joint
  • 7.1% fail on Brakes
    • 4.1% fail on Mechanical brake components (39% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.3% fail on Brake linings and pads (59% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 3.3% fail on Brake pads (60% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.0% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.0% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.28% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.28% fail on Cable (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.1% fail on Brake performance
      • 1.5% fail on Service brake performance
        • 1.5% fail on Rbt
          • 1.2% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.33% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.055% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.055% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 1.4% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 1.4% fail on Rbt (sp)
      • 0.33% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.33% fail on Rbt
          • 0.28% fail on Parking brake performance
          • 0.055% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
      • 0.11% fail on Brake performance not tested
      • 0.11% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp) (80% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.11% fail on Rbt (sp) (80% better than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.11% fail on Service brake imbalance
    • 0.39% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.28% fail on Anti-lock braking system
      • 0.22% fail on Electronic stability control
    • 0.22% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.22% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers
    • 0.17% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.11% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.055% fail on Lever
      • 0.055% fail on Electronic parking brake
    • 0.055% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.055% fail on Hand lever
    • 0.055% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.055% fail on Brake fluid
    • 0.055% fail on Rigid brake pipes
  • 6.7% fail on Tyres
    • 4.1% fail on Tread depth
    • 3.0% fail on Condition
    • 0.33% fail on Size/type
  • 5.6% fail on Visibility
    • 3.9% fail on Washers (45% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.7% fail on Wipers
    • 0.39% fail on Bonnet (180% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.055% fail on Driver's view
    • 0.055% fail on View to rear
      • 0.055% fail on Indirect vision devices
  • 5.3% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (54% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.9% fail on Exhaust emissions (50% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 4.1% fail on Compression ignition (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 2.5% fail on On or after 01/07/2008 (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.7% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.055% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Turbo
        • 0.055% fail on Emissions not tested
      • 0.77% fail on Spark ignition (62% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.72% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.055% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.39% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.22% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.11% fail on Hydraulic fluid leaks (15 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.055% fail on Other leaks
    • 0.11% fail on Noise suppression
      • 0.11% fail on Undertray (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
  • 4.1% fail on Steering (72% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.8% fail on Power steering (21 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.83% fail on Other components (39 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.72% fail on Operation (16 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.55% fail on Pipes and hoses (30 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.055% fail on Rams
    • 1.4% fail on Steering gear (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.3% fail on Steering rack (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.055% fail on Operation
      • 0.055% fail on Steering box
    • 0.94% fail on Steering linkage components (51% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.61% fail on Track rod end (66% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.22% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.055% fail on Drag link end
      • 0.055% fail on Steering arm
    • 0.11% fail on Steering play
      • 0.11% fail on Steering rack
    • 0.11% fail on Electronic power steering
  • 0.61% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.61% fail on Attachment
  • 0.55% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.33% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.33% fail on Condition
    • 0.11% fail on Airbags (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.055% fail on Drivers airbag
      • 0.055% fail on Passengers airbag
    • 0.11% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.11% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.11% fail on Registration plates
Read the Honest John Review

  • Citroen C5 (2008 - 2016)
    Very comfortable, fantastic all-speed refinement, lots of interior space, well equipped from mid-range upwards.

    Search Good Garages