MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Ford » Mondeo » 1996

Ford Mondeo MOT Results

Registered in 1996
50.5% pass rate
from 830 tests in 2017
(12% worse than other 1996 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 1996 cars and highlighted areas where the Ford Mondeo is unusually good or bad.

  • 25% fail on Suspension (36% worse than other 1996 cars)
    • 12% fail on Anti-roll bars (3 times worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 9.2% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (3 times worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 2.5% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (3 times worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.48% fail on Linkage condition
      • 0.36% fail on Attachment
    • 8.4% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 7.0% fail on Component mounting
      • 1.9% fail on Subframe mounting
      • 0.24% fail on Spring mounting
    • 7.1% fail on Suspension arms (130% worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 6.4% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (130% worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.60% fail on Condition (2 times worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.24% fail on Attachment
    • 2.3% fail on Coil springs (83% worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 2.2% fail on Condition (90% worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.24% fail on Location
    • 1.2% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 1.1% fail on Drive shafts (69% better than other 1996 cars)
      • 1.1% fail on Front drive shafts (69% better than other 1996 cars)
        • 1.1% fail on Constant velocity joints (68% better than other 1996 cars)
    • 0.72% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.72% fail on Front
      • 0.12% fail on Rear
    • 0.48% fail on Trailing arms
      • 0.24% fail on Condition (9 times worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.24% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.36% fail on Tie bars/rods
      • 0.24% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.12% fail on Condition
    • 0.24% fail on Radius arms
      • 0.12% fail on Condition
      • 0.12% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.24% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.24% fail on Condition
    • 0.12% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.12% fail on Condition
    • 0.12% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 0.12% fail on Condition
  • 18% fail on Brakes
    • 9.3% fail on Hydraulic systems (51% worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 8.8% fail on Components (57% worse than other 1996 cars)
        • 4.5% fail on Pipes
        • 4.0% fail on Hoses (110% worse than other 1996 cars)
        • 0.60% fail on Valves
        • 0.12% fail on Reservoirs
      • 0.72% fail on Leaks
      • 0.12% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp
      • 0.12% fail on Operation
    • 9.3% fail on Brake performance
      • 4.7% fail on Rear wheels
      • 4.6% fail on Front wheels
      • 2.5% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 0.72% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.72% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.36% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 1.7% fail on Hub components
      • 1.1% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.48% fail on Brake pads (69% better than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.12% fail on Brake back plates
    • 0.72% fail on Parking brake
      • 0.72% fail on Condition
    • 0.48% fail on ABS
    • 0.24% fail on Restricted movement
    • 0.12% fail on Service brake control components
      • 0.12% fail on Pedal
        • 0.12% fail on Anti-slip
    • 0.12% fail on Mechanical components
      • 0.12% fail on Cable
  • 15% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (28% better than other 1996 cars)
    • 5.4% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 4.0% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 2.8% fail on Stop lamp
    • 2.4% fail on Headlamps
      • 2.4% fail on Headlamp
    • 2.2% fail on Position lamps (56% better than other 1996 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.60% fail on Front lamps (82% better than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.12% fail on All position lamps
    • 1.6% fail on Direction indicators
      • 1.6% fail on Flashing type
        • 1.2% fail on Individual lamps
        • 0.24% fail on All direction indicators
        • 0.12% fail on Side repeaters
    • 0.60% fail on Battery
    • 0.12% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.12% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 0.12% fail on Fog lamp
      • 0.12% fail on Tell tale
    • 0.12% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.12% fail on Lamp
    • 0.12% fail on Horn
    • 0.12% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
  • 12% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 6.6% fail on Emissions
    • 5.9% fail on Exhaust system
    • 1.4% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.84% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.60% fail on System
      • 0.12% fail on Hose
      • 0.12% fail on Pipe
  • 9.5% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 5.7% fail on Washers (63% worse than other 1996 cars)
    • 4.7% fail on Wipers
    • 0.48% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.12% fail on Mirrors
  • 9.3% fail on Tyres (55% worse than other 1996 cars)
    • 5.7% fail on Tread depth (68% worse than other 1996 cars)
    • 4.7% fail on Condition (73% worse than other 1996 cars)
    • 0.12% fail on Size/type
  • 7.3% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 7.0% fail on Seat belts (43% worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 6.5% fail on Prescribed areas (53% worse than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.60% fail on Condition
    • 0.48% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 0.36% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
      • 0.12% fail on Drivers airbag
  • 6.0% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 3.1% fail on Body condition
    • 1.8% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 1.8% fail on Chassis
    • 0.60% fail on Doors
      • 0.36% fail on Passengers other
      • 0.12% fail on Drivers
      • 0.12% fail on Passengers front
    • 0.36% fail on Seats
      • 0.24% fail on Drivers
      • 0.12% fail on Passengers
    • 0.12% fail on Speedometer
    • 0.12% fail on Body security
  • 1.7% fail on Steering (64% better than other 1996 cars)
    • 1.1% fail on Steering system (73% better than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.60% fail on Track rod end (66% better than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.24% fail on Steering rack (81% better than other 1996 cars)
      • 0.12% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.12% fail on Steering arm
    • 0.48% fail on Power steering
      • 0.36% fail on Pipes and hoses
      • 0.12% fail on Operation
    • 0.24% fail on Locking devices
  • 1.2% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 1.2% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.36% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.24% fail on Condition
    • 0.12% fail on Attachment
  • 0.24% fail on Towbars
    • 0.24% fail on Vehicle structure
Read the Honest John Review

  • Ford Mondeo (1996 - 2000)
    Facelift of original. Criticisms of original very good Mondeo overcome, fine combination of ride, handling, performance, economy, and cheap maintenance.

    Search Good Garages