Nissan Tiida MOT Results

Registered in 2010
53.8% pass rate
from 286 tests in 2020
(38% worse than other 2010 cars)
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 Nissan Tiida is unusually good or bad.

  • 27% fail on Suspension (150% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 16% fail on Suspension arms (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 13% fail on Ball joint (6 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.8% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 1.4% fail on Ball joint dust cover (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on Suspension arm
    • 12% fail on Springs (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 12% fail on Coil springs (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 12% fail on Coil spring (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.7% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.0% fail on Linkage ball joints
      • 0.70% fail on Ball joint
    • 1.4% fail on Sub-frames (13 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.0% fail on Pins and bushes (22 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
    • 1.0% fail on Other suspension component (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.35% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.35% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.70% fail on Wheel bearings
  • 17% fail on Brakes (140% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 10% fail on Brake performance (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 5.2% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 5.2% fail on Rbt (sp) (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 4.9% fail on Parking brake performance (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 4.9% fail on Rbt (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 4.9% fail on Parking brake performance (8 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 4.2% fail on Service brake performance (150% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 3.8% fail on Rbt (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
          • 2.8% fail on Service brake performance
          • 1.0% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.35% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.35% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.70% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.70% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.70% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 0.35% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 6.3% fail on Rigid brake pipes (11 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.1% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 1.7% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 1.7% fail on Brake pads
      • 1.4% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.0% fail on Brake discs
        • 0.35% fail on Brake drums
    • 1.4% fail on Parking brake control (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Lever (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.0% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 1.0% fail on Hand lever (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.70% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.70% fail on Anti-lock braking system
    • 0.35% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.35% fail on Other components and prescribed areas
      • 0.35% fail on Other components
  • 12% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 2.8% fail on Stop lamp
    • 2.1% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 1.7% fail on Position lamps
      • 1.7% fail on Position lamp
    • 1.7% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.7% fail on Rear fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.7% fail on Rear fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.4% fail on Headlamps
      • 1.4% fail on Headlamp
    • 1.4% fail on Electrical equipment (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Horn (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on Battery(ies)
    • 1.0% fail on Direction indicators
      • 1.0% fail on Flashing type
        • 1.0% fail on Individual direction indicators
    • 0.70% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.70% fail on Headlamp aim
  • 6.6% fail on Visibility
    • 4.5% fail on Wipers
    • 2.4% fail on Washers
  • 6.6% fail on Tyres
    • 5.2% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.7% fail on Condition
  • 5.2% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 4.2% fail on Exhaust system (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.35% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 0.35% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 0.35% fail on Body
      • 0.35% fail on Other body component
    • 0.35% fail on Doors
      • 0.35% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.35% fail on Door condition
  • 2.8% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 2.8% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 2.8% fail on Spark ignition
        • 2.1% fail on Catalyst emissions (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.70% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.35% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 2.1% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 1.7% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.35% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.35% fail on Condition
  • 1.7% fail on Identification of the vehicle (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.7% fail on Registration plates (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)

Search Good Garages