Mitsubishi Grandis MOT Results

Registered in 2009
63.8% pass rate
from 287 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 2009 cars and highlighted areas where the Mitsubishi Grandis is unusually good or bad.

  • 18% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 8.0% fail on Position lamps (110% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 7.3% fail on Front lamps (150% worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on All position lamps
      • 0.35% fail on Rear lamps
    • 6.3% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 4.9% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 3.1% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.1% fail on Headlamp
    • 0.70% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 0.35% fail on Fog lamp
      • 0.35% fail on Switch
    • 0.70% fail on Stop lamp (78% better than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.70% fail on Direction indicators
      • 0.70% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.70% fail on Side repeaters
    • 0.35% fail on Battery
  • 11% fail on Brakes (71% worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 4.5% fail on Brake performance
      • 3.1% fail on Rear wheels
      • 3.1% fail on Parking brake performance (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.70% fail on Front wheels
      • 0.35% fail on Service brake performance
    • 4.2% fail on Hub components
      • 4.2% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.70% fail on Brake discs
    • 2.1% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 1.7% fail on Components
        • 1.7% fail on Pipes (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp
    • 1.4% fail on Parking brake
      • 1.4% fail on Condition
    • 0.70% fail on Service brake control components (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 0.70% fail on Pedal (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
        • 0.70% fail on Anti-slip (8 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.35% fail on Mechanical components
      • 0.35% fail on Linkage
  • 8.4% fail on Tyres
    • 4.5% fail on Tread depth
    • 3.5% fail on Condition
    • 0.35% fail on Size/type
  • 5.9% fail on Suspension (45% better than other 2009 cars)
    • 2.1% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.0% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.70% fail on Linkage condition
      • 0.35% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 1.7% fail on Suspension arms
      • 1.7% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 1.7% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 1.7% fail on Condition
    • 0.35% fail on Coil springs
      • 0.35% fail on Condition
    • 0.35% fail on Tie bars/rods
      • 0.35% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.35% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.35% fail on Front
    • 0.35% fail on Front suspension joints
  • 5.9% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 5.2% fail on Wipers
    • 0.35% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.35% fail on Washers
  • 3.8% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 3.1% fail on Fuel system (14 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      • 3.1% fail on Pipe (164 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    • 0.35% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.35% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 2.4% fail on Steering
    • 2.4% fail on Steering system
      • 1.4% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.35% fail on Free play
        • 0.35% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.35% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.35% fail on Ball joint
  • 1.4% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 1.4% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.70% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 0.70% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 0.70% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
  • 0.35% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.35% fail on Attachment
  • 0.35% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 0.35% fail on Body condition
Read the Honest John Review

Search Good Garages