Mitsubishi Challenger MOT Results

Registered in 1999
56.0% pass rate
from 248 tests in 2020
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 1999 cars and highlighted areas where the Mitsubishi Challenger is unusually good or bad.

  • 20% fail on Body, chassis, structure (80% worse than other 1999 cars)
    • 6.5% fail on Chassis (3 times worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 6.0% fail on Chassis condition (3 times worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Strengthening plate
    • 5.6% fail on Transmission
      • 5.2% fail on Drive shafts
        • 4.8% fail on Joints
        • 0.40% fail on Drive shaft
      • 0.40% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.40% fail on Joints
    • 5.2% fail on Exhaust system
    • 4.4% fail on Integral vehicle structure (200% worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 4.4% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition (2 times worse than other 1999 cars)
    • 1.6% fail on Body (2 times worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 0.81% fail on Panel
      • 0.40% fail on Mounting fixings
      • 0.40% fail on Other body component
    • 0.81% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.40% fail on Pipe
      • 0.40% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
    • 0.81% fail on Towbar
      • 0.81% fail on Vehicle structure
    • 0.81% fail on Cabs (9 times worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Steps
      • 0.40% fail on Prescribed areas
    • 0.40% fail on Spare wheel
      • 0.40% fail on Spare wheel condition
    • 0.40% fail on Floor
    • 0.40% fail on Seats
      • 0.40% fail on Driver's seat
    • 0.40% fail on Boot lid
      • 0.40% fail on Boot lid condition
  • 18% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 8.9% fail on Stop lamp (88% worse than other 1999 cars)
    • 3.6% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.6% fail on Headlamp
    • 2.8% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 2.8% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 2.8% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.81% fail on Switch (6 times worse than other 1999 cars)
    • 2.4% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 1.6% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.81% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 2.4% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 1.2% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 1.2% fail on Horn
    • 0.81% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 0.40% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.40% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.40% fail on Rear reflectors
  • 16% fail on Brakes
    • 9.3% fail on Rigid brake pipes (170% worse than other 1999 cars)
    • 4.8% fail on Brake performance
      • 3.2% fail on Service brake performance
        • 3.2% fail on Rbt
          • 3.2% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.40% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 2.8% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 2.8% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 2.0% fail on Service brake performance
          • 1.2% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 1.2% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 1.2% fail on Rbt (sp)
      • 0.40% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.40% fail on Rbt
          • 0.40% fail on Parking brake performance
    • 2.4% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 2.4% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 2.4% fail on Brake pads
    • 1.2% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 1.2% fail on Anti-lock braking system
    • 0.81% fail on Load sensing valves
    • 0.40% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.40% fail on Brake fluid
    • 0.40% fail on Other components and prescribed areas
      • 0.40% fail on Prescribed areas
        • 0.40% fail on Master cylinder/servo mounting
  • 16% fail on Suspension
    • 7.7% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 4.4% fail on Pins and bushes (9 times worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 3.2% fail on Linkage pins and bushes (3 times worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 0.81% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting (7 times worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 0.40% fail on Linkage
      • 0.40% fail on Linkage ball joints
    • 6.5% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 2.4% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 2.0% fail on Springs
      • 2.0% fail on Coil springs
        • 2.0% fail on Coil spring
    • 2.0% fail on Suspension arms
      • 0.81% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.81% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.40% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 1.2% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 0.81% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.81% fail on Ball joint
  • 10% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (120% worse than other 1999 cars)
    • 10% fail on Seat belts (2 times worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 8.9% fail on Prescribed areas (2 times worse than other 1999 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Condition
  • 8.1% fail on Visibility
    • 4.0% fail on Wipers
    • 3.6% fail on Washers
    • 0.40% fail on Driver's view
  • 4.8% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 4.0% fail on Exhaust emissions (52% better than other 1999 cars)
      • 2.0% fail on Spark ignition (74% better than other 1999 cars)
        • 2.0% fail on Catalyst emissions (67% better than other 1999 cars)
      • 2.0% fail on Compression ignition
        • 1.2% fail on Emissions not tested (8 times worse than other 1999 cars)
        • 0.81% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Turbo
    • 0.81% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.81% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 3.6% fail on Tyres
    • 2.4% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.2% fail on Condition
  • 3.2% fail on Steering
    • 1.2% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 1.2% fail on Track rod end
    • 0.81% fail on Steering gear
      • 0.81% fail on Steering box (14 times worse than other 1999 cars)
    • 0.40% fail on Prescribed areas
    • 0.40% fail on Power steering
      • 0.40% fail on Pump
    • 0.40% fail on Steering play
      • 0.40% fail on Steering box
  • 0.81% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.81% fail on Attachment
  • 0.40% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.40% fail on Registration plates

Search Good Garages