Mitsubishi Shogun MOT Results

Registered in 1992
63.4% pass rate
from 276 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 1992 cars and highlighted areas where the Mitsubishi Shogun is unusually good or bad.

  • 17% fail on Body, chassis, structure (71% worse than other 1992 cars)
    • 6.9% fail on Exhaust system (100% worse than other 1992 cars)
    • 5.1% fail on Transmission
      • 4.3% fail on Drive shafts
        • 4.0% fail on Joints
        • 0.36% fail on Drive shaft
      • 1.4% fail on Prop shafts
        • 1.4% fail on Joints (4 times worse than other 1992 cars)
    • 3.6% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 3.6% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 3.3% fail on Chassis
      • 3.3% fail on Chassis condition
    • 2.2% fail on Fuel system
      • 1.4% fail on Pipe (3 times worse than other 1992 cars)
      • 0.36% fail on Hose
      • 0.36% fail on System
    • 1.1% fail on Seats
      • 1.1% fail on Driver's seat
    • 0.36% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.36% fail on Doors
      • 0.36% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.36% fail on Door condition
    • 0.36% fail on Cabs
      • 0.36% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 14% fail on Brakes
    • 6.9% fail on Rigid brake pipes (190% worse than other 1992 cars)
    • 6.9% fail on Brake performance
      • 4.3% fail on Service brake performance
        • 4.3% fail on Rbt
          • 4.3% fail on Service brake performance
      • 2.2% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 1.4% fail on Decelerometer (sp) (4 times worse than other 1992 cars)
        • 0.72% fail on Rbt (sp)
      • 0.72% fail on Brake performance not tested
      • 0.72% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.36% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.36% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.36% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 0.72% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.72% fail on Rbt
          • 0.72% fail on Parking brake performance
    • 2.5% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 2.5% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 2.5% fail on Brake pads (170% worse than other 1992 cars)
      • 0.36% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 0.36% fail on Brake discs
    • 1.1% fail on Other components and prescribed areas (3 times worse than other 1992 cars)
      • 0.72% fail on Prescribed areas
        • 0.72% fail on Master cylinder/servo mounting (5 times worse than other 1992 cars)
      • 0.36% fail on Additional braking device
    • 0.72% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.36% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.36% fail on Anti-lock braking system
  • 14% fail on Suspension
    • 4.7% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 4.3% fail on Anti-roll bars (2 times worse than other 1992 cars)
      • 2.5% fail on Linkage pins and bushes (6 times worse than other 1992 cars)
      • 1.1% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.72% fail on Linkage
    • 2.5% fail on Suspension arms
      • 1.4% fail on Ball joint
      • 1.1% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.72% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.36% fail on Suspension arm
    • 1.8% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 1.4% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 0.72% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.72% fail on Sub-frame mounting prescribed areas
    • 0.72% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.36% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.36% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.36% fail on Springs
      • 0.36% fail on Coil springs
        • 0.36% fail on Mounting
  • 12% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 4.7% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 4.7% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 4.7% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 3.3% fail on Stop lamp
    • 2.9% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 1.8% fail on Horn
      • 0.72% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.36% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 2.2% fail on Headlamps
      • 2.2% fail on Headlamp
    • 2.2% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 2.2% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 2.2% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 0.72% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.72% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.72% fail on Mandatory tell-tales
      • 0.36% fail on Main beam tell-tale
      • 0.36% fail on Rear fog lamp tell-tale
    • 0.36% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.36% fail on Switch
  • 6.2% fail on Visibility
    • 3.3% fail on Washers
    • 2.5% fail on Wipers
    • 0.36% fail on Bonnet
    • 0.36% fail on View to rear
      • 0.36% fail on Mirrors
  • 5.4% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 5.4% fail on Seat belts
      • 5.4% fail on Prescribed areas (130% worse than other 1992 cars)
  • 5.1% fail on Steering
    • 3.3% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 2.5% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.72% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.36% fail on Drag link end
      • 0.36% fail on Intermediate drop arm
      • 0.36% fail on Lock stop
    • 0.72% fail on Steering play
      • 0.72% fail on Steering box (9 times worse than other 1992 cars)
    • 0.36% fail on Steering gear
      • 0.36% fail on Steering box
    • 0.36% fail on Prescribed areas
    • 0.36% fail on Steering column
  • 5.1% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 3.3% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 1.8% fail on Spark ignition (67% better than other 1992 cars)
        • 0.72% fail on Non catalyst emissions
        • 0.72% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.36% fail on Catalyst emissions
      • 1.4% fail on Compression ignition
        • 1.1% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Turbo
        • 0.36% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 2.2% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 2.2% fail on Engine oil leaks (2 times worse than other 1992 cars)
      • 0.36% fail on Transmission oil leaks
  • 2.2% fail on Tyres
    • 2.2% fail on Tread depth
  • 0.72% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.72% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.36% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.36% fail on Attachment

Search Good Garages