FIAT Panda MOT Results

Registered in 2010
61.7% pass rate
from 10,278 tests in 2020
(9.7% worse than other 2010 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 2010 cars and highlighted areas where the FIAT Panda is unusually good or bad.

  • 17% fail on Suspension (58% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 9.6% fail on Suspension arms (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 6.3% fail on Pins and bushes (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.1% fail on Ball joint (82% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.0% fail on Ball joint dust cover (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.049% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.029% fail on Suspension arm
    • 5.9% fail on Shock absorbers (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.6% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.8% fail on Linkage ball joints (100% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.41% fail on Ball joint (56% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover (81% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Ball joint dust cover (77% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.068% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
      • 0.029% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.029% fail on Linkage (85% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.019% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.0097% fail on Anti-roll bar
    • 1.5% fail on Springs (62% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Coil springs (62% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.4% fail on Coil spring (63% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.049% fail on Mounting
      • 0.019% fail on Spring mounting prescribed areas
    • 0.37% fail on Macpherson strut (200% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Pins and bushes (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.097% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.068% fail on Macpherson strut
    • 0.37% fail on Other suspension component (81% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.16% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.13% fail on Pins and bushes (160% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.058% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.019% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.019% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
    • 0.18% fail on Wheel bearings (61% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.058% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.029% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.0097% fail on Suspension rod
      • 0.0097% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.0097% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.039% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 0.029% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.029% fail on Sub-frame
  • 10% fail on Tyres (60% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 8.4% fail on Tread depth (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.4% fail on Condition (18% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.20% fail on Size/type
  • 7.5% fail on Brakes
    • 4.9% fail on Brake performance (54% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.6% fail on Service brake performance (57% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 2.6% fail on Rbt (56% worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 2.0% fail on Service brake performance (44% worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.74% fail on Service brake imbalance (110% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.088% fail on Plate brake tester (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.088% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles) (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (34% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.7% fail on Rbt (sp) (39% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.068% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 1.4% fail on Parking brake performance (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.3% fail on Rbt (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 1.2% fail on Parking brake performance (140% worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.078% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
          • 0.019% fail on Parking brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
        • 0.019% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.0097% fail on Parking brake performance
          • 0.0097% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
        • 0.0097% fail on Decelerometer
          • 0.0097% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 1.1% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp) (150% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.1% fail on Rbt (sp) (150% worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 1.0% fail on Service brake imbalance (200% worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.088% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.019% fail on Plate brake tester (sp)
          • 0.019% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.0097% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 0.097% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 2.4% fail on Mechanical brake components (26% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.7% fail on Brake linings and pads (32% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.7% fail on Brake pads (32% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.0097% fail on Brake linings
      • 0.59% fail on Brake discs and drums (41% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.58% fail on Brake discs (42% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.0097% fail on Brake drums
      • 0.19% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages (140% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.17% fail on Cable (190% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.019% fail on Clevis joint (32 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.0097% fail on Lever
    • 0.32% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.32% fail on Lever
    • 0.26% fail on Flexible brake hoses (180% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.22% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders) (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Hydraulic brake cylinder (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.019% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers
    • 0.17% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC (57% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.17% fail on Anti-lock braking system (45% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.14% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.11% fail on Brake fluid
      • 0.019% fail on Reservoirs
      • 0.0097% fail on Valves
    • 0.13% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever (58% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.088% fail on Hand lever
      • 0.039% fail on Pedal (69% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.078% fail on Other components and prescribed areas (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.058% fail on Other components (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.019% fail on Additional braking device (25 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.049% fail on Rigid brake pipes (91% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.0097% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 0.0097% fail on Leaks
  • 7.4% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (43% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.5% fail on Headlamp aim (18% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.4% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.049% fail on Headlamp aim not tested (80% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.7% fail on Direction indicators
      • 1.7% fail on Flashing type
        • 1.4% fail on Individual direction indicators
        • 0.20% fail on Side repeaters (68% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.13% fail on All direction indicators
    • 1.4% fail on Stop lamp (52% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.3% fail on Position lamps (34% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.3% fail on Position lamp (33% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.0097% fail on All position lamps
    • 0.72% fail on Headlamps (75% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.70% fail on Headlamp (74% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.019% fail on Headlamp levelling device (80% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.28% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (38% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.28% fail on Rear fog lamp (38% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.28% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.27% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.27% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.25% fail on Registration plate lamp(s) (88% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.088% fail on Electrical equipment (75% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.039% fail on Horn (82% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.029% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.0097% fail on Trailer electrical socket
      • 0.0097% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.019% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.019% fail on Mandatory tell-tales
      • 0.0097% fail on Main beam tell-tale
      • 0.0097% fail on Rear fog lamp tell-tale
  • 6.8% fail on Visibility (37% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.3% fail on Wipers (78% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.4% fail on Washers
    • 0.29% fail on View to rear (110% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.29% fail on Mirrors (110% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.11% fail on Driver's view
    • 0.078% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.078% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.0097% fail on Bonnet
  • 3.2% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 2.4% fail on Exhaust system (73% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.25% fail on Transmission (79% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Drive shafts (84% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.18% fail on Joints (84% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.019% fail on Drive shaft
      • 0.068% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.029% fail on Prop shaft (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.029% fail on Joints
        • 0.0097% fail on Bearing housing
    • 0.23% fail on Doors
      • 0.17% fail on Driver's door (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.17% fail on Door condition (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.058% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.058% fail on Door condition
      • 0.019% fail on Front passenger's door
        • 0.019% fail on Door condition
    • 0.14% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.088% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
      • 0.019% fail on Tank
      • 0.019% fail on System
      • 0.0097% fail on Pipe
    • 0.078% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.068% fail on Body
      • 0.049% fail on Other body component
      • 0.019% fail on Panel
      • 0.0097% fail on Body condition
    • 0.058% fail on Seats
      • 0.058% fail on Driver's seat
    • 0.029% fail on Engine mounting
      • 0.019% fail on Bracket
      • 0.0097% fail on Engine mounting condition
    • 0.0097% fail on Boot lid
      • 0.0097% fail on Boot lid condition
  • 2.3% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (21% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.1% fail on Exhaust emissions (23% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.7% fail on Spark ignition
        • 1.1% fail on Catalyst emissions (65% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.46% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (41% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.28% fail on Emissions not tested (64% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.019% fail on Non catalyst emissions
      • 0.43% fail on Compression ignition (65% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.29% fail on On or after 01/07/2008 (58% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.058% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Non turbo
        • 0.058% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (86% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.0097% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Turbo
        • 0.0097% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.21% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.17% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.029% fail on Transmission oil leaks
      • 0.029% fail on Hydraulic fluid leaks
    • 0.019% fail on Noise suppression
      • 0.0097% fail on Sound deadening material
      • 0.0097% fail on Undertray
  • 0.87% fail on Steering (52% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.67% fail on Steering linkage components (56% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.59% fail on Track rod end (58% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.078% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.12% fail on Electronic power steering (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.049% fail on Steering gear (72% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.049% fail on Steering rack (71% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.019% fail on Steering play
      • 0.019% fail on Steering rack
    • 0.0097% fail on Power steering
      • 0.0097% fail on Operation
    • 0.0097% fail on Steering wheel
    • 0.0097% fail on Steering column
  • 0.25% fail on Identification of the vehicle (39% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.25% fail on Registration plates (39% better than other 2010 cars)
  • 0.19% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (74% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.13% fail on Seat belts (64% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Condition (66% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.019% fail on Requirements
    • 0.068% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp (82% better than other 2010 cars)
  • 0.088% fail on Road Wheels (78% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.058% fail on Attachment (79% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.029% fail on Condition (76% better than other 2010 cars)
  • 0.0097% fail on Seat belt installation check
    • 0.0097% fail on Belt(s)/padding
Read the Honest John Review

  • Fiat Panda (2004 - 2012)
    Compact and practical. Enjoyable and easy to drive. Narrow size makes it easy to park. Good space for those in the back.

    Search Good Garages