MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Citroen » C4 » 2010

Citroen C4 MOT Results

Registered in 2010
59.6% pass rate
from 3,255 tests in 2017
(37% 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 C4 is unusually good or bad.

  • 26% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (93% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 9.2% fail on Stop lamp (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 7.4% fail on Headlamp aim (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 7.0% fail on Position lamps (140% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 5.3% fail on Front lamps (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.0% fail on Rear lamps (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.031% fail on All position lamps
    • 6.3% fail on Registration plate lamp (74% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 5.1% fail on Headlamps (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 5.0% fail on Headlamp (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.061% fail on Headlamp defects which don't require an aim check on retest
        • 0.061% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
      • 0.031% fail on Headlamp defects which do require an aim check on retest
        • 0.031% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
    • 2.6% fail on Direction indicators (74% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.6% fail on Flashing type (74% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 2.3% fail on Individual lamps (180% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.25% fail on All direction indicators
        • 0.092% fail on Side repeaters (83% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.61% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 0.61% fail on Fog lamp
    • 0.15% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 0.12% fail on Horn
    • 0.061% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.061% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.031% fail on Trailer electrical socket
  • 10% fail on Suspension (26% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.5% fail on Drive shafts (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.5% fail on Front drive shafts (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 3.5% fail on Constant velocity joints (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.2% fail on Coil springs
      • 3.2% fail on Condition
    • 2.8% fail on Anti-roll bars (76% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.4% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (88% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.031% fail on Linkage condition
    • 0.71% fail on Wheel bearings (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.58% fail on Front (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.12% fail on Rear
    • 0.49% fail on Suspension arms (62% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.49% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (61% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.28% fail on Tie bars/rods (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.28% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.18% fail on Shock absorbers (83% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Condition (83% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.12% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 0.092% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.092% fail on Condition
    • 0.061% fail on Air suspension (13 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.061% fail on Suspension unit (30 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.031% fail on Bonded suspension
      • 0.031% fail on Condition
    • 0.031% fail on Trailing arms
      • 0.031% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
  • 8.0% fail on Tyres (18% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 5.7% fail on Tread depth (63% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.7% fail on Condition
    • 0.15% fail on Valve stem
    • 0.092% fail on Size/type
  • 7.4% fail on Brakes (33% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.2% fail on Hub components (53% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.7% fail on Brake pads (58% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.80% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.031% fail on Brake linings
    • 2.7% fail on Brake performance
      • 1.6% fail on Rear wheels (57% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.58% fail on Front wheels
      • 0.52% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 0.18% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.092% fail on Brake performance not tested
      • 0.061% fail on Brake operation
    • 0.43% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.37% fail on Components
        • 0.25% fail on Hoses
        • 0.061% fail on Pipes (79% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.061% fail on Reservoirs
      • 0.031% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp
      • 0.031% fail on Leaks
    • 0.40% fail on ABS
    • 0.28% fail on Restricted movement (160% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.22% fail on Parking brake
      • 0.15% fail on Electronic parking brake (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.061% fail on Condition (81% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.15% fail on Service brake control components
      • 0.15% fail on Pedal
        • 0.15% fail on Anti-slip
    • 0.061% fail on Electronic stability system
  • 6.3% fail on Steering (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 6.1% fail on Steering system (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.8% fail on Track rod end (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.3% fail on Steering rack (8 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.77% fail on Steering arm (41 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.65% fail on Ball joint (8 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.58% fail on Free play (30 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.58% fail on Steering rack (30 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.22% fail on Drag link end (15 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.031% fail on Other components
        • 0.031% fail on Steering pivot point
    • 0.12% fail on Power steering
      • 0.061% fail on Operation
      • 0.061% fail on Pump (30 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.061% fail on Steering operation
    • 0.031% fail on Steering control
      • 0.031% fail on Steering wheel
  • 4.8% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 3.0% fail on Washers (65% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.3% fail on Wipers (50% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.52% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.12% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.061% fail on Bonnet
  • 0.92% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 0.37% fail on Exhaust system (61% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.34% fail on Emissions
    • 0.25% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.25% fail on System (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.061% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 0.74% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 0.49% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 0.49% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp (94% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.28% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.18% fail on Condition
      • 0.092% fail on Requirements (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
  • 0.52% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.52% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.18% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.15% fail on Attachment
    • 0.031% fail on Condition
  • 0.15% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 0.092% fail on Doors
      • 0.061% fail on Passengers front
      • 0.031% fail on Drivers
    • 0.031% fail on Engine mountings
    • 0.031% fail on Body condition
Read the Honest John Review

  • Citroen C4 (2004 - 2010)
    Brave styling, decent quality interior and excellent crash test ratings. 1.6 HDi EGS qualifies for £30pa tax. Good compromise between ride and handling

    Search Good Garages