Peugeot 106 MOT Results
Registered in 199547.4% pass rate
from 589 tests in 2017
(24% worse than other 1995 cars)
Pass rate by mileage
More MoT Results
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 1995 cars and highlighted areas where the Peugeot 106 is unusually good or bad.
-
24% fail on
Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
- 5.6% fail on Headlamp aim
-
5.4% fail on
Position lamps
- 3.1% fail on Front lamps
- 2.7% fail on Rear lamps
- 0.17% fail on Switch
- 5.4% fail on Registration plate lamp
-
5.3% fail on
Direction indicators
(80% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
5.3% fail on
Flashing type
(80% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 3.9% fail on Side repeaters (3 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 1.2% fail on Individual lamps
- 0.17% fail on All direction indicators
- 0.17% fail on Tell tales
-
5.3% fail on
Flashing type
(80% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 4.9% fail on Stop lamp
-
3.7% fail on
Headlamps
- 3.7% fail on Headlamp
- 1.7% fail on Battery
-
1.2% fail on
Rear fog lamp
(62% better than other 1995 cars)
- 1.2% fail on Fog lamp (59% better than other 1995 cars)
- 0.51% fail on Horn
- 0.17% fail on Electrical wiring
-
0.17% fail on
Hazard warning
- 0.17% fail on Switch
- 0.17% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
-
23% fail on
Suspension
(35% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
9.3% fail on
Prescribed areas
(48% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 8.1% fail on Component mounting (59% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 1.2% fail on Subframe mounting
- 0.17% fail on Spring mounting
-
6.6% fail on
Drive shafts
(120% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
6.5% fail on
Front drive shafts
(120% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 6.5% fail on Constant velocity joints (120% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
0.17% fail on
Any drive shaft which is part of the suspension
- 0.17% fail on Drive shafts
-
6.5% fail on
Front drive shafts
(120% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
5.4% fail on
Suspension arms
(95% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 5.4% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (110% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
2.2% fail on
Wheel bearings
- 1.4% fail on Front
- 0.85% fail on Rear
-
1.7% fail on
Shock absorbers
- 1.7% fail on Condition
- 1.0% fail on Front suspension joints
-
0.85% fail on
Radius arms
(3 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.85% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (4 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.68% fail on General condition (18 times worse than other 1995 cars)
-
0.51% fail on
Anti-roll bars
(82% better than other 1995 cars)
- 0.34% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (82% better than other 1995 cars)
- 0.17% fail on Attachment
-
0.51% fail on
Axles
- 0.34% fail on Axle beam (19 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.17% fail on Clearance
-
0.34% fail on
Macpherson strut
- 0.34% fail on Condition
-
9.3% fail on
Prescribed areas
(48% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
22% fail on
Brakes
(47% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
16% fail on
Brake performance
(95% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 8.3% fail on Front wheels (150% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 5.6% fail on Rear wheels (74% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 5.6% fail on Parking brake performance (68% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 4.6% fail on Service brake performance (160% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 1.5% fail on Brake imbalance (180% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
5.3% fail on
Hydraulic systems
-
5.3% fail on
Components
- 4.1% fail on Pipes
- 1.5% fail on Hoses
- 0.17% fail on Valves
- 0.17% fail on Leaks
-
5.3% fail on
Components
-
3.2% fail on
Parking brake
(2 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 3.2% fail on Condition (2 times worse than other 1995 cars)
-
2.2% fail on
Hub components
- 1.2% fail on Brake pads
- 1.0% fail on Brake discs
- 0.17% fail on Brake calipers
- 0.34% fail on Restricted movement
-
0.17% fail on
Service brake control components
-
0.17% fail on
Pedal
- 0.17% fail on Anti-slip
-
0.17% fail on
Pedal
-
0.17% fail on
Air and vacuum systems
-
0.17% fail on
Components
- 0.17% fail on Servos
-
0.17% fail on
Components
-
0.17% fail on
Prescribed areas
- 0.17% fail on Park brake mechanism/associated mountings
-
16% fail on
Brake performance
(95% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
21% fail on
Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
(97% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 15% fail on Emissions (160% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 6.8% fail on Exhaust system
-
2.0% fail on
Fuel system
- 1.5% fail on System (4 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.34% fail on Pipe
- 0.17% fail on Hose
- 0.85% fail on Emissions not tested
-
8.1% fail on
Tyres
(48% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 3.9% fail on Condition
- 3.9% fail on Tread depth
- 0.34% fail on Size/type
- 0.34% fail on Valve stem
-
8.0% fail on
Driver's view of the road
- 3.9% fail on Wipers
- 3.9% fail on Washers
- 0.34% fail on Windscreen
- 0.34% fail on Mirrors
- 0.17% fail on Bonnet
-
7.5% fail on
Body, Structure and General Items
-
2.7% fail on
Seats
(4 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 2.4% fail on Drivers (7 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.68% fail on Passengers
- 2.5% fail on Body condition
-
1.5% fail on
Vehicle structure
- 1.5% fail on Chassis
-
1.2% fail on
Doors
- 0.68% fail on Passengers front
- 0.34% fail on Drivers
- 0.17% fail on Passengers other
- 0.17% fail on Spare wheel
-
2.7% fail on
Seats
(4 times worse than other 1995 cars)
-
2.5% fail on
Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
(49% better than other 1995 cars)
-
2.5% fail on
Seat belts
- 1.5% fail on Prescribed areas (59% better than other 1995 cars)
- 1.0% fail on Attachment (10 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.34% fail on Condition
-
2.5% fail on
Seat belts
-
2.0% fail on
Steering
(58% better than other 1995 cars)
-
1.7% fail on
Steering system
(57% better than other 1995 cars)
- 1.0% fail on Steering rack
- 0.51% fail on Ball joint
- 0.17% fail on Track rod end
- 0.51% fail on Prescribed areas (4 times worse than other 1995 cars)
-
1.7% fail on
Steering system
(57% better than other 1995 cars)
-
0.34% fail on
Registration plates and VIN
- 0.34% fail on Registration plate
-
0.17% fail on
Road Wheels
- 0.17% fail on Attachment