MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Mitsubishi » Canter » 2010

Mitsubishi Canter MOT Results

Registered in 2010
67.2% pass rate
from 137 tests in 2017
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 Mitsubishi Canter is unusually good or bad.

  • 23% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (69% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 10% fail on Registration plate lamp (180% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 8.8% fail on Position lamps (200% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 6.6% fail on Rear lamps (10 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 5.8% fail on Front lamps
    • 5.1% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 4.4% fail on Stop lamp
    • 3.6% fail on Rear fog lamp (9 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.6% fail on Fog lamp (9 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.73% fail on Tell tale
    • 2.9% fail on Direction indicators
      • 2.9% fail on Flashing type
        • 2.2% fail on All direction indicators (13 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.5% fail on Individual lamps
    • 0.73% fail on Rear reflectors
  • 11% fail on Tyres
    • 6.6% fail on Tread depth
    • 4.4% fail on Condition
  • 9.5% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 2.9% fail on Wipers
    • 2.9% fail on Washers
    • 2.2% fail on Mirrors (17 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.5% fail on Windscreen
  • 8.0% fail on Suspension
    • 4.4% fail on Axles (612 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.6% fail on King pins (4968 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.73% fail on Stub axle
    • 2.2% fail on Leaf springs (6558 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.5% fail on Condition (5465 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.73% fail on Pins and bushes
        • 0.73% fail on Shackle
    • 2.2% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 0.73% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.73% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.73% fail on Linkage condition
    • 0.73% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.73% fail on Front
    • 0.73% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 0.73% fail on Condition
  • 5.8% fail on Brakes
    • 3.6% fail on Brake performance
      • 2.2% fail on Service brake performance (27 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.5% fail on Rear wheels
      • 0.73% fail on Brake imbalance
    • 2.2% fail on Hub components
      • 2.2% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.73% fail on Brake discs
    • 0.73% fail on Service brake control components
      • 0.73% fail on Pedal
        • 0.73% fail on Condition
    • 0.73% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.73% fail on Operation
  • 2.9% fail on Steering
    • 2.9% fail on Steering system
      • 2.2% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.73% fail on Other components
        • 0.73% fail on Steering pivot point
  • 2.9% fail on Body, Structure and General Items (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.73% fail on Speedometer
    • 0.73% fail on Body condition
    • 0.73% fail on Seats
      • 0.73% fail on Drivers
    • 0.73% fail on Load security
      • 0.73% fail on Hinged tailboard
  • 2.2% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 2.2% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.73% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.73% fail on Tank
  • 1.5% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 1.5% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.73% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 0.73% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.73% fail on Prescribed areas

Search Good Garages