MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Peugeot » 5008 » 2010

Peugeot 5008 MOT Results

Registered in 2010
57.2% pass rate
from 2,899 tests in 2017
(47% worse than other 2010 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 2010 cars and highlighted areas where the Peugeot 5008 is unusually good or bad.

  • 27% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (100% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 11% fail on Registration plate lamp (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 9.7% fail on Stop lamp (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 6.1% fail on Position lamps (110% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 5.8% fail on Front lamps (140% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.28% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.069% fail on All position lamps
    • 5.9% fail on Headlamp aim (71% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.4% fail on Headlamps (96% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 4.4% fail on Headlamp (100% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.034% fail on Headlamp defects which don't require an aim check on retest
        • 0.034% fail on Headlamp levelling device
      • 0.034% fail on Headlamp defects which do require an aim check on retest
        • 0.034% fail on Headlamp levelling device
    • 0.52% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 0.52% fail on Fog lamp
    • 0.31% fail on Direction indicators (80% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.31% fail on Flashing type (80% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.17% fail on Side repeaters (68% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.10% fail on Individual lamps (88% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.034% fail on All direction indicators
    • 0.21% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 0.10% fail on Electrical wiring (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.069% fail on Horn
    • 0.034% fail on Battery
    • 0.034% fail on Trailer electrical socket
  • 10% fail on Brakes (79% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 5.2% fail on Hub components (88% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 4.3% fail on Brake pads (80% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Brake discs (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.10% fail on Brake calipers
    • 4.3% fail on Brake performance (97% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.3% fail on Parking brake performance (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Rear wheels
      • 0.41% fail on Front wheels
      • 0.24% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.069% fail on Brake operation
      • 0.034% fail on Service brake performance
    • 0.45% fail on ABS (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.41% fail on Parking brake
      • 0.41% fail on Electronic parking brake (13 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.31% fail on Service brake control components (190% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.31% fail on Pedal (190% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.31% fail on Anti-slip (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.31% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.24% fail on Components
        • 0.17% fail on Hoses
        • 0.069% fail on Pipes
      • 0.069% fail on Leaks
    • 0.21% fail on Electronic stability system
    • 0.14% fail on Mechanical components (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on Cable (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.034% fail on Additional braking devices
    • 0.034% fail on Restricted movement
  • 9.6% fail on Suspension (18% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 5.3% fail on Coil springs (61% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 5.2% fail on Condition (59% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.10% fail on Location
    • 1.3% fail on Drive shafts (79% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.3% fail on Front drive shafts (82% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 1.3% fail on Constant velocity joints (83% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.2% fail on Suspension arms
      • 1.1% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.069% fail on Attachment
    • 1.1% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 0.79% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.21% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.034% fail on Condition
      • 0.034% fail on Linkage condition
    • 0.69% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 0.69% fail on Condition
    • 0.41% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 0.38% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.28% fail on Front
      • 0.10% fail on Rear
    • 0.34% fail on Macpherson strut (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.34% fail on Condition (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.069% fail on Tie bars/rods
      • 0.069% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.034% fail on Fluid suspension
      • 0.034% fail on Suspension unit
    • 0.034% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.034% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
  • 8.4% fail on Tyres (24% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 5.9% fail on Tread depth (68% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.9% fail on Condition
    • 0.21% fail on Size/type
    • 0.14% fail on Valve stem
    • 0.034% fail on Tyre pressure monitoring system
  • 6.3% fail on Driver's view of the road (33% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.9% fail on Washers (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.2% fail on Wipers
    • 0.38% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.069% fail on Mirrors
  • 2.3% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.4% fail on Supplementary restraint systems (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.3% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.034% fail on Drivers airbag
    • 1.0% fail on Seat belts (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.97% fail on Condition (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.034% fail on Requirements
      • 0.034% fail on Attachment
  • 1.6% fail on Steering (52% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.3% fail on Steering system
      • 1.2% fail on Track rod end (71% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.069% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.069% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.034% fail on Free play
        • 0.034% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.034% fail on Drag link end
    • 0.10% fail on Steering operation
    • 0.069% fail on Power steering
      • 0.069% fail on Operation
      • 0.034% fail on Other components
    • 0.034% fail on Steering control
      • 0.034% fail on Steering wheel
  • 1.1% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 0.38% fail on Emissions
    • 0.31% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.14% fail on Tank (15 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on System
      • 0.034% fail on Cap
    • 0.21% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.17% fail on Exhaust system (82% better than other 2010 cars)
  • 0.52% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.38% fail on Attachment
    • 0.14% fail on Condition
  • 0.38% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 0.31% fail on Seats (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.24% fail on Passengers (8 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.069% fail on Drivers
    • 0.069% fail on Body condition
  • 0.28% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.28% fail on Registration plate
Read the Honest John Review

  • Peugeot 5008 (2010 - 2017)
    Roomy full seven-seat MPV with disappearing rearmost seats. 2506-litre boot capacity. Good ride quality. Very comfortable. Well priced.

    Search Good Garages