Chevrolet Captiva MOT Results

Registered in 2009
56.1% pass rate
from 1,115 tests in 2017
(35% worse than other 2009 cars)
Pass rate by mileage
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 2009 cars and highlighted areas where the Chevrolet Captiva is unusually good or bad.

  • 27% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (74% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 11% fail on Stop lamp (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 7.4% fail on Position lamps (99% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 7.0% fail on Front lamps (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.54% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.18% fail on All position lamps (5 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 6.8% fail on Registration plate lamp (69% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 6.6% fail on Headlamps (150% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 6.5% fail on Headlamp (160% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Headlamp defects which don't require an aim check on retest
        • 0.18% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
    • 2.3% fail on Direction indicators
      • 2.3% fail on Flashing type
        • 1.4% fail on Side repeaters (170% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.81% fail on Individual lamps
        • 0.090% fail on All direction indicators
    • 2.3% fail on Headlamp aim (42% better than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.72% fail on Battery (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.72% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 0.72% fail on Fog lamp
    • 0.18% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 0.090% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.090% fail on Trailer electrical socket
    • 0.090% fail on Horn
  • 13% fail on Suspension (23% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 4.8% fail on Suspension arms (160% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 4.7% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (160% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.090% fail on Attachment
    • 3.3% fail on Coil springs
      • 3.3% fail on Condition
    • 2.3% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.9% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.36% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.090% fail on Attachment
    • 2.3% fail on Drive shafts (110% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 2.3% fail on Front drive shafts (120% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 2.2% fail on Constant velocity joints (110% worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.090% fail on Couplings
    • 1.3% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 1.3% fail on Condition
    • 0.54% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.36% fail on Front
      • 0.18% fail on Rear
    • 0.54% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 0.18% fail on Front suspension retaining and locking devices (27 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  • 12% fail on Brakes (90% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 4.6% fail on Hub components (63% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 3.9% fail on Brake pads (69% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.90% fail on Brake discs
    • 4.2% fail on Brake performance (47% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 3.0% fail on Parking brake performance (200% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 1.9% fail on Rear wheels
      • 0.36% fail on Parking brake operation (120 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.36% fail on Front wheels
      • 0.27% fail on Brake operation (11 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.090% fail on Service brake performance
    • 2.2% fail on Parking brake (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 2.2% fail on Condition (4 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 2.2% fail on ABS (7 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.99% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.90% fail on Components
        • 0.72% fail on Pipes
        • 0.18% fail on Hoses
      • 0.090% fail on Operation
    • 0.36% fail on Electronic stability system (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.090% fail on Additional braking devices
  • 7.6% fail on Tyres
    • 4.8% fail on Tread depth
    • 3.7% fail on Condition
  • 6.8% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 4.1% fail on Wipers (47% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 2.5% fail on Washers
    • 0.45% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.18% fail on Bonnet
  • 4.4% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 4.1% fail on Supplementary restraint systems (11 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 3.6% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp (10 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.54% fail on Drivers airbag (24 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.36% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.27% fail on Condition
      • 0.090% fail on Installation check
        • 0.090% fail on Anchorage's
  • 3.3% fail on Steering (180% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 2.8% fail on Steering system (160% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 2.4% fail on Track rod end (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.27% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.090% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.63% fail on Power steering (5 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.27% fail on Other components (10 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Operation
      • 0.090% fail on Pipes and hoses
      • 0.090% fail on Pump
  • 1.7% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 1.5% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.18% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.090% fail on Cap
      • 0.090% fail on System
    • 0.090% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 0.63% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.63% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.36% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 0.27% fail on Doors
      • 0.27% fail on Passengers other
    • 0.090% fail on Body condition
  • 0.18% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.18% fail on Attachment
Read the Honest John Review

  • Chevrolet Captiva (2007 - 2015)
    Good value for money. Well equipped as standard. Seats seven reasonably comfortably. Quiet when cruising. Decent diesel engine. Improved facelifted model from 2011.

    Search Good Garages