Chevrolet Orlando MOT Results

Registered in 2012
67.1% pass rate
from 2,266 tests in 2017
(56% worse than other 2012 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 2012 cars and highlighted areas where the Chevrolet Orlando is unusually good or bad.

  • 18% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (130% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 8.9% fail on Registration plate lamp (3 times worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 8.5% fail on Position lamps (4 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 8.0% fail on Front lamps (5 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.57% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.044% fail on Switch
    • 3.1% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 1.9% fail on Headlamps
      • 1.9% fail on Headlamp
      • 0.044% fail on Headlamp defects which do require an aim check on retest
        • 0.044% fail on Main beam 'tell-tale'
    • 1.3% fail on Stop lamp
    • 1.0% fail on Direction indicators
      • 1.0% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.62% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.22% fail on All direction indicators
        • 0.22% fail on Individual lamps
    • 0.13% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 0.13% fail on Fog lamp
    • 0.13% fail on Horn
    • 0.044% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.044% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
  • 7.6% fail on Brakes (98% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 6.2% fail on Hub components (160% worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 6.0% fail on Brake pads (180% worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.044% fail on Brake calipers
    • 1.0% fail on Brake performance
      • 0.49% fail on Rear wheels
      • 0.44% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 0.22% fail on Service brake performance (2 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Front wheels
      • 0.044% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.044% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 0.22% fail on Service brake control components (2 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.22% fail on Pedal (2 times worse than other 2012 cars)
        • 0.22% fail on Anti-slip (3 times worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.18% fail on Electronic stability system
    • 0.18% fail on Parking brake
      • 0.18% fail on Condition
    • 0.13% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.13% fail on Components
        • 0.088% fail on Hoses
        • 0.044% fail on Pipes
    • 0.13% fail on ABS
    • 0.044% fail on Restricted movement
  • 6.2% fail on Tyres
    • 3.9% fail on Tread depth (39% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 2.4% fail on Condition
    • 0.044% fail on Size/type
    • 0.044% fail on Valve stem
  • 6.1% fail on Driver's view of the road (38% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 4.2% fail on Wipers (44% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 1.4% fail on Washers
    • 0.62% fail on Windscreen (120% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.22% fail on Mirrors
  • 5.1% fail on Suspension (40% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 4.5% fail on Coil springs (180% worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 4.5% fail on Condition (180% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.22% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 0.13% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.044% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.044% fail on Linkage condition
    • 0.22% fail on Drive shafts
      • 0.22% fail on Front drive shafts
        • 0.22% fail on Constant velocity joints
    • 0.088% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 0.044% fail on Suspension arms
      • 0.044% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.044% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.044% fail on Attachment
    • 0.044% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.044% fail on Front
    • 0.044% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 0.044% fail on Condition
  • 0.97% fail on Steering (150% worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.57% fail on Steering control (57 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on Steering wheel (131 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Steering column (67 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.044% fail on Steering coupling
        • 0.044% fail on Universal joint
    • 0.22% fail on Steering system
      • 0.13% fail on Free play (21 times worse than other 2012 cars)
        • 0.13% fail on Steering rack (23 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.044% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.044% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.044% fail on Steering arm
    • 0.18% fail on Power steering (4 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.088% fail on Other components (24 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.044% fail on Operation
      • 0.044% fail on Pipes and hoses
  • 0.79% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 0.53% fail on Emissions (3 times worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.18% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.13% fail on System (4 times worse than other 2012 cars)
      • 0.044% fail on Cap
    • 0.044% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.044% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 0.66% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.66% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.35% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 0.22% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.22% fail on Condition
    • 0.18% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 0.13% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
      • 0.044% fail on Drivers airbag
  • 0.31% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 0.18% fail on Doors
      • 0.18% fail on Passengers other (6 times worse than other 2012 cars)
    • 0.13% fail on Body condition
  • 0.13% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.088% fail on Condition
    • 0.044% fail on Attachment
Read the Honest John Review

  • Chevrolet Orlando (2011 - 2015)
    Seven seats as standard. Easy and comfortable to drive. Decent value and well equipped. Five year/100,000 mile warranty. Chain-cam diesel engine.

    Search Good Garages