Ford Cougar MOT Results

Registered in 1998
34.1% pass rate
from 85 tests in 2017
(41% worse than other 1998 cars)
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 1998 cars and highlighted areas where the Ford Cougar is unusually good or bad.

  • 32% fail on Suspension (58% worse than other 1998 cars)
    • 13% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 9.4% fail on Component mounting
      • 3.5% fail on Subframe mounting
    • 8.2% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 4.7% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 3.5% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (4 times worse than other 1998 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Attachment
    • 4.7% fail on Sub-frames (12 times worse than other 1998 cars)
      • 4.7% fail on Condition (24 times worse than other 1998 cars)
    • 3.5% fail on Suspension arms
      • 3.5% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 3.5% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 3.5% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 3.5% fail on Condition
    • 3.5% fail on Drive shafts
      • 3.5% fail on Front drive shafts
        • 2.4% fail on Constant velocity joints
        • 1.2% fail on Couplings
    • 1.2% fail on Trailing arms
      • 1.2% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 1.2% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 1.2% fail on Front
  • 31% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 14% fail on Headlamp aim (150% worse than other 1998 cars)
    • 7.1% fail on Headlamps
      • 7.1% fail on Headlamp
    • 5.9% fail on Stop lamp
    • 4.7% fail on Position lamps
      • 3.5% fail on Front lamps
      • 1.2% fail on Rear lamps
    • 4.7% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 2.4% fail on Battery
    • 2.4% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 2.4% fail on Fog lamp
      • 1.2% fail on Tell tale
    • 2.4% fail on Direction indicators
      • 2.4% fail on Flashing type
        • 1.2% fail on All direction indicators
        • 1.2% fail on Individual lamps
    • 1.2% fail on Electrical wiring
  • 31% fail on Brakes (85% worse than other 1998 cars)
    • 19% fail on Brake performance (110% worse than other 1998 cars)
      • 13% fail on Parking brake performance (2 times worse than other 1998 cars)
      • 7.1% fail on Rear wheels
      • 2.4% fail on Service brake performance
      • 1.2% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 1.2% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 18% fail on Hydraulic systems (180% worse than other 1998 cars)
      • 16% fail on Components (180% worse than other 1998 cars)
        • 16% fail on Pipes (3 times worse than other 1998 cars)
        • 1.2% fail on Hoses
      • 1.2% fail on Operation
    • 8.2% fail on Hub components (2 times worse than other 1998 cars)
      • 5.9% fail on Brake pads (2 times worse than other 1998 cars)
      • 2.4% fail on Brake discs
      • 1.2% fail on Brake calipers
    • 1.2% fail on ABS
  • 14% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 8.2% fail on Wipers
    • 5.9% fail on Washers
  • 9.4% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 5.9% fail on Emissions
    • 2.4% fail on Exhaust system
    • 1.2% fail on Fuel system
      • 1.2% fail on Tank
  • 8.2% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 7.1% fail on Seat belts
      • 7.1% fail on Prescribed areas
    • 1.2% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 1.2% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
  • 8.2% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 4.7% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 4.7% fail on Chassis
    • 3.5% fail on Body condition
  • 4.7% fail on Steering
    • 3.5% fail on Power steering (4 times worse than other 1998 cars)
      • 2.4% fail on Operation (13 times worse than other 1998 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Pipes and hoses
    • 1.2% fail on Steering system
      • 1.2% fail on Track rod end
  • 4.7% fail on Tyres
    • 4.7% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.2% fail on Condition
  • 1.2% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 1.2% fail on Registration plate

Search Good Garages