Nissan Pulsar MOT Results

Registered in 2015
87.3% pass rate
from 7,901 tests in 2020
(18% better than other 2015 cars)
Pass rate by mileage
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 2015 cars and highlighted areas where the Nissan Pulsar is unusually good or bad.

  • 4.5% fail on Tyres (18% worse than other 2015 cars)
    • 3.5% fail on Tread depth (71% worse than other 2015 cars)
    • 1.0% fail on Condition (44% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.063% fail on Size/type
    • 0.025% fail on Tyre pressure monitoring system
  • 3.2% fail on Brakes (18% worse than other 2015 cars)
    • 2.5% fail on Mechanical brake components (29% worse than other 2015 cars)
      • 2.4% fail on Brake linings and pads (42% worse than other 2015 cars)
        • 2.4% fail on Brake pads (41% worse than other 2015 cars)
        • 0.038% fail on Brake linings
      • 0.13% fail on Brake discs and drums (63% better than other 2015 cars)
        • 0.11% fail on Brake discs (67% better than other 2015 cars)
        • 0.013% fail on Brake drums
    • 0.46% fail on Brake performance
      • 0.23% fail on Service brake performance
        • 0.22% fail on Rbt
          • 0.14% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.076% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.013% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.013% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.089% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 0.089% fail on Rbt (sp)
      • 0.063% fail on Brake performance not tested
      • 0.051% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.051% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.038% fail on Service brake imbalance
          • 0.025% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.051% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.051% fail on Rbt
          • 0.025% fail on Parking brake performance
          • 0.013% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
          • 0.013% fail on Parking brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
    • 0.18% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC (170% worse than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.18% fail on Electronic stability control (2 times worse than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.025% fail on Anti-lock braking system
    • 0.16% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.16% fail on Lever
    • 0.051% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.051% fail on Hand lever
    • 0.013% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 0.013% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.013% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers
  • 2.3% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (44% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 1.4% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 1.4% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 0.33% fail on Stop lamp (47% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.25% fail on Direction indicators
      • 0.25% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.20% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.051% fail on Individual direction indicators
    • 0.10% fail on Position lamps (61% better than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.089% fail on Position lamp (65% better than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.013% fail on All position lamps
    • 0.10% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.051% fail on Battery(ies) (3 times worse than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.051% fail on Horn
    • 0.076% fail on Headlamps (90% better than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.063% fail on Headlamp (90% better than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.013% fail on Headlamp levelling device
    • 0.051% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (74% better than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.051% fail on Rear fog lamp (74% better than other 2015 cars)
        • 0.051% fail on Rear fog lamp (74% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.051% fail on Registration plate lamp(s) (88% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.013% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.013% fail on Switch
    • 0.013% fail on Rear reflectors
  • 1.4% fail on Visibility (63% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.76% fail on Washers (29% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.38% fail on Wipers (86% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.13% fail on Driver's view
    • 0.10% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.10% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.063% fail on View to rear
      • 0.063% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.025% fail on Bonnet
  • 1.3% fail on Suspension
    • 0.54% fail on Suspension arms
      • 0.51% fail on Ball joint (160% worse than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.038% fail on Pins and bushes (73% better than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.013% fail on Suspension arm
    • 0.51% fail on Springs
      • 0.51% fail on Coil springs
        • 0.51% fail on Coil spring
    • 0.063% fail on Shock absorbers (78% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.063% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 0.038% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 0.013% fail on Linkage
      • 0.013% fail on Linkage ball joints
    • 0.051% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.025% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.025% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.013% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.013% fail on Ball joint
  • 0.54% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 0.51% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 0.42% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.29% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.13% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.038% fail on Emissions not tested
        • 0.013% fail on Emission control equipment
          • 0.013% fail on Oxygen sensor
      • 0.089% fail on Compression ignition (69% better than other 2015 cars)
        • 0.063% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.013% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
        • 0.013% fail on On or after 01/01/2014
    • 0.038% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.025% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.013% fail on Other leaks
  • 0.27% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.24% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.24% fail on Condition
    • 0.025% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.22% fail on Body, chassis, structure (57% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.063% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.051% fail on Transmission (69% better than other 2015 cars)
      • 0.051% fail on Drive shafts
        • 0.051% fail on Joints
    • 0.051% fail on Body
      • 0.051% fail on Other body component
    • 0.025% fail on Doors
      • 0.013% fail on Front passenger's door
        • 0.013% fail on Door condition
      • 0.013% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.013% fail on Door condition
    • 0.013% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.013% fail on Tank
    • 0.013% fail on Seats
      • 0.013% fail on Passenger's seat
  • 0.13% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.13% fail on Attachment
  • 0.089% fail on Identification of the vehicle (60% better than other 2015 cars)
    • 0.089% fail on Registration plates (60% better than other 2015 cars)
  • 0.089% fail on Steering
    • 0.089% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 0.089% fail on Track rod end
Read the Honest John Review

  • Nissan Pulsar (2014 - 2018)
    Refined and comfortable hatchback, huge amounts of rear legroom, quiet engines even at motorway speeds, good equipment levels as standard.

    Search Good Garages