MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Mercedes-Benz » CLC » 2010

Mercedes-Benz CLC MOT Results

Registered in 2010
58.2% pass rate
from 2,740 tests in 2021
(16% worse than other 2010 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 2010 cars and highlighted areas where the Mercedes-Benz CLC is unusually good or bad.

  • 23% fail on Suspension (74% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 13% fail on Suspension arms (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 11% fail on Ball joint (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 1.3% fail on Ball joint dust cover (190% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.036% fail on Suspension arm
    • 9.7% fail on Springs (78% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 9.7% fail on Coil springs (78% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 9.7% fail on Coil spring (79% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.5% fail on Anti-roll bars (28% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.0% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover (71% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.69% fail on Linkage ball joints
      • 0.69% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.62% fail on Pins and bushes (9 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.62% fail on Linkage pins and bushes (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.15% fail on Anti-roll bar (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.036% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.036% fail on Linkage
    • 0.36% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.33% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.29% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.036% fail on Pins and bushes
    • 0.22% fail on Shock absorbers (74% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.11% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.073% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.036% fail on Ball joint
  • 12% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 5.2% fail on Direction indicators (150% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 5.2% fail on Flashing type (150% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 3.2% fail on Individual direction indicators (150% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 2.0% fail on Side repeaters (180% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.18% fail on All direction indicators
    • 3.6% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.6% fail on Headlamp
      • 0.036% fail on Headlamp levelling device
    • 3.2% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 2.8% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.40% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 2.4% fail on Stop lamp
    • 0.29% fail on Registration plate lamp(s) (85% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.15% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.15% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.036% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 0.036% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.036% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.036% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.036% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.036% fail on Rear reflectors
  • 8.4% fail on Tyres (38% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 5.6% fail on Tread depth (67% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.0% fail on Condition
    • 0.40% fail on Size/type
  • 8.1% fail on Brakes
    • 4.7% fail on Brake performance
      • 2.7% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (48% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 2.6% fail on Rbt (sp) (55% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.036% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 1.7% fail on Service brake performance
        • 1.6% fail on Rbt
          • 1.4% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.29% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.073% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.073% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.84% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.84% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.66% fail on Service brake performance (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 0.26% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 0.73% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.73% fail on Rbt
          • 0.66% fail on Parking brake performance
          • 0.036% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
          • 0.036% fail on Parking brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.15% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 2.6% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 1.9% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 1.9% fail on Brake pads
        • 0.073% fail on Brake linings
      • 0.73% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 0.73% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.073% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.036% fail on Clevis joint
        • 0.036% fail on Brake slack adjuster
    • 1.5% fail on Rigid brake pipes (95% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.26% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.26% fail on Lever
    • 0.26% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.15% fail on Anti-lock braking system (69% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Electronic stability control
      • 0.036% fail on Electronic braking system
    • 0.073% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.036% fail on Pedal
      • 0.036% fail on Hand lever
    • 0.073% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.036% fail on Brake fluid
      • 0.036% fail on Valves
    • 0.073% fail on Flexible brake hoses
  • 7.1% fail on Visibility (33% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.1% fail on Washers (51% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.2% fail on Wipers
    • 0.11% fail on Bonnet
    • 0.11% fail on View to rear
      • 0.11% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.073% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.073% fail on Windscreen
  • 3.4% fail on Steering (43% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.4% fail on Steering linkage components (75% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.2% fail on Track rod end (76% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.15% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.036% fail on Drag link end
    • 0.15% fail on Steering gear
      • 0.15% fail on Steering rack
    • 0.036% fail on Power steering
      • 0.036% fail on Operation
    • 0.036% fail on Steering play
      • 0.036% fail on Steering rack
  • 2.6% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 2.6% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 2.0% fail on Spark ignition
        • 1.5% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (52% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.69% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.15% fail on Emissions not tested
      • 0.58% fail on Compression ignition (54% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.33% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.29% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
    • 0.11% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.11% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 2.0% fail on Body, chassis, structure (50% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.3% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.22% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.22% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
    • 0.22% fail on Boot lid (9 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Boot lid condition (8 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.036% fail on Other boot lid component
    • 0.18% fail on Seats
      • 0.18% fail on Driver's seat (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.036% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.036% fail on Transmission
      • 0.036% fail on Drive shafts
        • 0.036% fail on Joints
    • 0.036% fail on Body
      • 0.036% fail on Other body component
    • 0.036% fail on Doors
      • 0.036% fail on Driver's door
        • 0.036% fail on Hinge
  • 1.1% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.80% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
    • 0.40% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.40% fail on Condition
    • 0.036% fail on Airbags
      • 0.036% fail on Passengers airbag
  • 1.0% fail on Road Wheels (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.77% fail on Attachment (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.29% fail on Condition
  • 0.47% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.47% fail on Registration plates
Read the Honest John Review

Search Good Garages