Mazda CX-3 MOT Results
Registered in 201686.0% pass rate
from 4,935 tests in 2021
(14% better than other 2016 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 2016 cars and highlighted areas where the Mazda CX-3 is unusually good or bad.
-
4.4% fail on
Visibility
- 3.7% fail on Wipers (29% worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.79% fail on Washers
-
0.020% fail on
Condition of glass
- 0.020% fail on Window
-
0.020% fail on
View to rear
- 0.020% fail on Mirrors
-
3.0% fail on
Tyres
(24% better than other 2016 cars)
- 1.9% fail on Condition
- 1.2% fail on Tread depth (39% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.020% fail on Size/type
-
2.0% fail on
Brakes
(27% better than other 2016 cars)
-
1.4% fail on
Mechanical brake components
-
1.3% fail on
Brake linings and pads
- 1.3% fail on Brake pads
- 0.020% fail on Brake linings
-
0.18% fail on
Brake discs and drums
(62% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.18% fail on Brake discs (62% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.020% fail on
Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
- 0.020% fail on Cable
-
1.3% fail on
Brake linings and pads
-
0.49% fail on
Brake performance
-
0.34% fail on
Service brake performance
-
0.34% fail on
Rbt
- 0.20% fail on Service brake imbalance (160% worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.16% fail on Service brake performance
-
0.34% fail on
Rbt
-
0.10% fail on
Parking brake efficiency (sp)
- 0.081% fail on Rbt (sp)
- 0.020% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
-
0.081% fail on
Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
-
0.081% fail on
Rbt (sp)
- 0.061% fail on Service brake imbalance
- 0.020% fail on Service brake performance
-
0.081% fail on
Rbt (sp)
- 0.020% fail on Brake performance not tested
-
0.020% fail on
Parking brake performance
-
0.020% fail on
Rbt
- 0.020% fail on Parking brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
-
0.020% fail on
Rbt
-
0.34% fail on
Service brake performance
- 0.12% fail on Rigid brake pipes (2 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
0.020% fail on
Parking brake control
- 0.020% fail on Lever
-
1.4% fail on
Mechanical brake components
-
1.6% fail on
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
(4 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
1.6% fail on
Seat belts
(8 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 1.6% fail on Condition (9 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
1.6% fail on
Seat belts
(8 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
1.6% fail on
Suspension
(25% better than other 2016 cars)
-
1.3% fail on
Springs
-
1.3% fail on
Coil springs
- 1.3% fail on Coil spring
-
1.3% fail on
Coil springs
-
0.14% fail on
Anti-roll bars
- 0.081% fail on Linkage (3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.041% fail on Linkage ball joints
- 0.020% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
- 0.041% fail on Shock absorbers
-
0.041% fail on
Suspension arms
(92% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.020% fail on Suspension arm
- 0.020% fail on Ball joint
- 0.020% fail on Ball joint dust cover
- 0.020% fail on Wheel bearings
-
1.3% fail on
Springs
-
1.5% fail on
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
(57% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.91% fail on
Headlamp aim
(36% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.91% fail on Headlamp aim (33% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.18% fail on
Direction indicators
-
0.18% fail on
Flashing type
- 0.16% fail on Side repeaters
- 0.020% fail on Individual direction indicators
-
0.18% fail on
Flashing type
- 0.16% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
-
0.10% fail on
Headlamps
(86% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.081% fail on Headlamp (87% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.020% fail on Headlamp levelling device
- 0.081% fail on Stop lamp (87% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.061% fail on
Front and rear fog lamps
-
0.061% fail on
Rear fog lamp
- 0.061% fail on Rear fog lamp
-
0.061% fail on
Rear fog lamp
-
0.020% fail on
Electrical equipment
- 0.020% fail on Battery(ies)
-
0.91% fail on
Headlamp aim
(36% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.39% fail on
Noise, emissions and leaks
(54% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.39% fail on
Exhaust emissions
(52% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.20% fail on
Compression ignition
- 0.12% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
- 0.041% fail on On or after 01/01/2014
- 0.041% fail on Emissions not tested
-
0.18% fail on
Spark ignition
(61% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.10% fail on Catalyst emissions
- 0.061% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (79% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.020% fail on Emissions not tested
-
0.20% fail on
Compression ignition
-
0.39% fail on
Exhaust emissions
(52% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.10% fail on
Identification of the vehicle
- 0.10% fail on Registration plates
-
0.061% fail on
Body, chassis, structure
(89% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.020% fail on Exhaust system
- 0.020% fail on Bumpers
-
0.020% fail on
Transmission
-
0.020% fail on
Drive shafts
- 0.020% fail on Joints
-
0.020% fail on
Drive shafts
-
0.061% fail on
Road Wheels
- 0.041% fail on Attachment
- 0.020% fail on Condition
-
0.020% fail on
Steering
-
0.020% fail on
Steering linkage components
- 0.020% fail on Locking devices
-
0.020% fail on
Steering linkage components
-
0.020% fail on
Seat belt installation check
- 0.020% fail on Belt(s)/padding
Read the Honest John Review
-
Mazda CX-3 (2015 - 2019)
Enjoyable and good to drive. Good quality interior finish. 2.0-litre petrol is smooth and economical.