Mazda Tribute MOT Results

Registered in 2003
44.9% pass rate
from 350 tests in 2017
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 2003 cars and highlighted areas where the Mazda Tribute is unusually good or bad.

  • 28% fail on Suspension (35% worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 14% fail on Prescribed areas (5 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 9.4% fail on Component mounting (4 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 4.9% fail on Spring mounting (41 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 2.0% fail on Subframe mounting (3 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 8.3% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 6.9% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 1.4% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 6.3% fail on Suspension arms
      • 6.3% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 3.7% fail on Drive shafts
      • 3.7% fail on Front drive shafts
        • 3.7% fail on Constant velocity joints
    • 2.6% fail on Coil springs
      • 2.3% fail on Condition
      • 0.29% fail on Location
    • 0.86% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.86% fail on Front
    • 0.57% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 0.29% fail on Bonded suspension
      • 0.29% fail on Condition
    • 0.29% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.29% fail on Condition
    • 0.29% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.29% fail on Condition
    • 0.29% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 0.29% fail on Condition
  • 27% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 11% fail on Registration plate lamp (62% worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 9.1% fail on Position lamps
      • 8.3% fail on Front lamps
      • 0.57% fail on All position lamps (7 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.29% fail on Rear lamps
    • 5.7% fail on Headlamps
      • 5.7% fail on Headlamp
    • 4.6% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 3.7% fail on Direction indicators
      • 3.7% fail on Flashing type
        • 3.1% fail on Individual lamps
        • 0.29% fail on All direction indicators
        • 0.29% fail on Side repeaters
    • 2.9% fail on Stop lamp
    • 1.4% fail on Hazard warning (5 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Switch (9 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 1.1% fail on Battery
    • 1.1% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 1.1% fail on Fog lamp
    • 0.29% fail on Horn
    • 0.29% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
  • 21% fail on Brakes
    • 15% fail on Hydraulic systems (140% worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 14% fail on Components (140% worse than other 2003 cars)
        • 12% fail on Hoses (7 times worse than other 2003 cars)
        • 3.4% fail on Pipes
        • 0.29% fail on Reservoirs
      • 0.86% fail on Operation (7 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.86% fail on Leaks
      • 0.29% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp
    • 5.4% fail on Brake performance
      • 1.4% fail on Service brake performance
      • 1.4% fail on Parking brake performance (67% better than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.86% fail on Rear wheels (77% better than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.86% fail on Brake performance not tested (4 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.57% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.57% fail on Front wheels
      • 0.29% fail on Gradient hand brake
      • 0.29% fail on Brake operation
    • 2.6% fail on ABS (150% worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 2.0% fail on Hub components
      • 1.4% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.57% fail on Brake discs
    • 1.1% fail on Parking brake
      • 1.1% fail on Condition
    • 0.29% fail on Mechanical components
      • 0.29% fail on Cable
  • 11% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 7.4% fail on Exhaust system (70% worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 4.6% fail on Emissions
    • 0.57% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.29% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.29% fail on Pipe
  • 9.7% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 6.3% fail on Wipers
    • 2.0% fail on Washers
    • 1.4% fail on Bonnet (8 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 0.86% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.57% fail on Windscreen
  • 9.4% fail on Body, Structure and General Items (3 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 6.0% fail on Body condition (6 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 3.1% fail on Vehicle structure (7 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 3.1% fail on Chassis (7 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 0.57% fail on Doors
      • 0.29% fail on Drivers
      • 0.29% fail on Passengers other
    • 0.29% fail on Engine mountings
    • 0.29% fail on Body security
  • 6.9% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems (110% worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 6.6% fail on Seat belts (2 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 5.4% fail on Prescribed areas (3 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.86% fail on Condition
      • 0.29% fail on Requirements
    • 0.29% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 0.29% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
  • 6.0% fail on Tyres
    • 3.7% fail on Tread depth
    • 2.3% fail on Condition
  • 5.1% fail on Steering
    • 5.1% fail on Steering system
      • 2.3% fail on Track rod end
      • 1.4% fail on Ball joint (3 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.57% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.57% fail on Steering arm
      • 0.29% fail on Drag link end
  • 2.3% fail on Towbars (57 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 2.3% fail on Vehicle structure (73 times worse than other 2003 cars)
  • 0.57% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.57% fail on Registration plate

Search Good Garages