Land Rover Defender 90 MOT Results

Registered in 2010
71.1% pass rate
from 506 tests in 2020
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 Land Rover Defender 90 is unusually good or bad.

  • 15% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 4.3% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 4.2% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.20% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 3.8% fail on Stop lamp
    • 3.0% fail on Position lamps
      • 3.0% fail on Position lamp
    • 3.0% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 1.4% fail on Reversing lamps (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Reversing lamps (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.2% fail on Direction indicators
      • 1.2% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.79% fail on Individual direction indicators
        • 0.40% fail on All direction indicators
    • 0.99% fail on Headlamps (66% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.99% fail on Headlamp
    • 0.99% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 0.99% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.99% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.79% fail on Rear reflectors (12 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.79% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.59% fail on Horn
      • 0.20% fail on Trailer electrical socket
  • 9.5% fail on Brakes
    • 3.4% fail on Rigid brake pipes (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.2% fail on Brake performance
      • 2.4% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp) (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 2.2% fail on Rbt (sp) (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 2.0% fail on Service brake performance (14 times worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.40% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.20% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 0.59% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 0.40% fail on Rbt (sp)
        • 0.20% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 0.40% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.20% fail on Rbt
          • 0.20% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.20% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.20% fail on Decelerometer
          • 0.20% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.20% fail on Brake performance not tested
      • 0.20% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.20% fail on Rbt
          • 0.20% fail on Parking brake performance
    • 3.0% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 2.0% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 2.0% fail on Brake pads
      • 1.6% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.6% fail on Brake discs
    • 0.79% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.59% fail on Anti-lock braking system
      • 0.20% fail on Electronic stability control
    • 0.40% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.40% fail on Lever
    • 0.20% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.20% fail on Pedal
    • 0.20% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 0.20% fail on Servos
  • 4.9% fail on Visibility
    • 3.2% fail on Wipers
    • 2.0% fail on Washers
    • 0.20% fail on Driver's view
    • 0.20% fail on View to rear
      • 0.20% fail on Mirrors
  • 3.6% fail on Suspension (67% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.79% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.79% fail on Suspension arms (75% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.20% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.20% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.79% fail on Anti-roll bars (73% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.59% fail on Linkage ball joints
      • 0.20% fail on Pins and bushes
    • 0.59% fail on Axles (6 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Swivel joints/housing (380 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Swivel pins and bushes
    • 0.40% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas (18 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.20% fail on Springs
      • 0.20% fail on Coil springs
        • 0.20% fail on Coil spring
    • 0.20% fail on Shock absorbers
  • 3.4% fail on Steering
    • 3.2% fail on Steering linkage components (110% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.79% fail on Ball joint (10 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.79% fail on Drag link end (33 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Intermediate drop arm (489 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.20% fail on Steering wheel
  • 1.6% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 0.79% fail on Exhaust emissions (70% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.79% fail on Compression ignition
        • 0.59% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.20% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.79% fail on Fluid leaks (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.40% fail on Other leaks (17 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Transmission oil leaks
  • 1.2% fail on Body, chassis, structure (62% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.59% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.40% fail on Tank (13 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Hose
    • 0.40% fail on Towbar (89 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Vehicle structure (571 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.20% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.20% fail on Body
      • 0.20% fail on Other body component
  • 0.99% fail on Tyres (84% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.59% fail on Tread depth (84% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.40% fail on Condition (86% better than other 2010 cars)
  • 0.59% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.59% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.40% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.40% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.40% fail on Condition

Search Good Garages