Mitsubishi Canter MOT Results

Registered in 2003
53.5% pass rate
from 159 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 Mitsubishi Canter is unusually good or bad.

  • 34% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 13% fail on Position lamps (76% worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 9.4% fail on Front lamps
      • 3.8% fail on Rear lamps
      • 1.3% fail on All position lamps (18 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 11% fail on Direction indicators (3 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 11% fail on Flashing type (3 times worse than other 2003 cars)
        • 8.2% fail on Individual lamps (3 times worse than other 2003 cars)
        • 5.0% fail on Side repeaters (5 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 9.4% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 9.4% fail on Rear fog lamp (5 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 8.8% fail on Fog lamp (4 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.63% fail on Switch
    • 5.7% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 4.4% fail on Stop lamp
    • 1.3% fail on Battery
    • 1.3% fail on Trailer electrical socket (46 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 0.63% fail on Headlamps
      • 0.63% fail on Headlamp
    • 0.63% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.63% fail on Horn
  • 18% fail on Suspension
    • 8.8% fail on Axles (177 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 8.8% fail on King pins (3133 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 3.8% fail on Leaf springs (1591 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 1.9% fail on Condition (2148 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.63% fail on Pins and bushes
        • 0.63% fail on Shackle
      • 0.63% fail on Anchor bracket
      • 0.63% fail on Securing bolts
    • 3.1% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.3% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.63% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.63% fail on Attachment
      • 0.63% fail on Linkage condition
    • 1.9% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 1.9% fail on Front
    • 1.9% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 1.9% fail on Condition
    • 1.3% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.63% fail on Component mounting
      • 0.63% fail on Spring mounting
    • 0.63% fail on Suspension arms
      • 0.63% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
  • 16% fail on Brakes
    • 11% fail on Brake performance
      • 8.2% fail on Rear wheels (120% worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 5.7% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 4.4% fail on Front wheels
      • 1.3% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.63% fail on Brake imbalance
    • 3.8% fail on Parking brake (2 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 3.8% fail on Condition (2 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 2.5% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 1.9% fail on Components
        • 1.3% fail on Valves
        • 0.63% fail on Pipes
        • 0.63% fail on Hoses
      • 0.63% fail on Leaks
    • 1.9% fail on Mechanical components (6 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 1.9% fail on Cable (8 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.63% fail on Pivot
    • 1.3% fail on Hub components
      • 0.63% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.63% fail on Brake calipers
    • 1.3% fail on Restricted movement
    • 0.63% fail on Service brake control components
      • 0.63% fail on Pedal
        • 0.63% fail on Condition
    • 0.63% fail on Locking devices
  • 11% fail on Steering (120% worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 11% fail on Steering system (150% worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 6.9% fail on Track rod end
      • 3.1% fail on Ball joint (9 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 1.9% fail on Drag link end (24 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 1.3% fail on Steering operation (13 times worse than other 2003 cars)
  • 11% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 10% fail on Exhaust system (130% worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 1.9% fail on Fuel system
      • 1.3% fail on Tank (11 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.63% fail on Cap
    • 1.3% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 11% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 7.5% fail on Wipers
    • 5.7% fail on Washers
    • 3.1% fail on Mirrors (7 times worse than other 2003 cars)
  • 10% fail on Tyres
    • 6.3% fail on Tread depth
    • 4.4% fail on Condition
  • 6.9% fail on Body, Structure and General Items (2 times worse than other 2003 cars)
    • 1.9% fail on Body condition
    • 1.3% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 1.3% fail on Chassis
    • 1.3% fail on Seats
      • 1.3% fail on Drivers (7 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 0.63% fail on Passengers
    • 0.63% fail on Speedometer
    • 0.63% fail on Body security
    • 0.63% fail on Doors
      • 0.63% fail on Passengers front
    • 0.63% fail on Load security
      • 0.63% fail on Tailgate
    • 0.63% fail on Spare wheel
  • 5.7% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 5.7% fail on Seat belts (2 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 2.5% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 1.9% fail on Requirements (25 times worse than other 2003 cars)
      • 1.9% fail on Condition
  • 1.3% fail on Road Wheels
    • 1.3% fail on Attachment
  • 0.63% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.63% fail on Registration plate

Search Good Garages