Proton GEN-2 MOT Results

Registered in 2009

45.7% pass rate

from 247 tests in 2020

(51% worse than other 2009 cars)

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 2009 cars and highlighted areas where the Proton GEN-2 is unusually good or bad.

25% fail on Brakes (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 16% fail on Brake performance (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 13% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    - 13% fail on Rbt (sp) (7 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 8.9% fail on Parking brake performance (11 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    - 8.5% fail on Rbt (11 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      - 7.7% fail on Parking brake performance (12 times worse than other 2009 cars)
      - 0.81% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance) (10 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    - 0.40% fail on Plate brake tester
      - 0.40% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
  - 2.8% fail on Service brake performance
    - 2.8% fail on Rbt
      - 2.0% fail on Service brake performance
      - 0.81% fail on Service brake imbalance
  - 1.2% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
    - 1.2% fail on Rbt (sp)
      - 0.81% fail on Service brake imbalance
      - 0.40% fail on Service brake performance
- 5.3% fail on Rigid brake pipes (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 4.0% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever (12 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 4.0% fail on Hand lever (19 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 3.2% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders) (26 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 2.8% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers (35 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 0.40% fail on Hydraulic brake cylinder
- 2.8% fail on Mechanical brake components
  - 2.4% fail on Brake linings and pads
    - 2.4% fail on Brake pads
  - 0.81% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    - 0.81% fail on Lever (37 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 1.2% fail on Parking brake control
  - 1.2% fail on Lever
- 0.40% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
  - 0.40% fail on Electronic stability control
25% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (79% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 10% fail on Headlamp aim (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 9.7% fail on Headlamp aim (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 0.40% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
- 6.5% fail on Headlamps (100% worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 4.5% fail on Headlamp
  - 2.0% fail on Headlamp levelling device (16 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 5.7% fail on Electrical equipment (12 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 3.2% fail on Horn (11 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 2.0% fail on Battery(ies) (14 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 0.40% fail on Electrical wiring
- 5.3% fail on Position lamps (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 5.3% fail on Position lamp (140% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 4.5% fail on Stop lamp
- 4.5% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
- 1.2% fail on Direction indicators
  - 1.2% fail on Flashing type
    - 0.81% fail on Individual direction indicators
    - 0.40% fail on All direction indicators
- 0.40% fail on Hazard warning
  - 0.40% fail on Switch
- 0.40% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
  - 0.40% fail on Rear fog lamp
    - 0.40% fail on Rear fog lamp
- 0.40% fail on Reversing lamps
  - 0.40% fail on Reversing lamps
13% fail on Body, chassis, structure (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 6.5% fail on Exhaust system (2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 3.2% fail on Transmission
  - 2.8% fail on Drive shafts
    - 2.8% fail on Joints
  - 0.40% fail on Prop shafts
    - 0.40% fail on Joints
- 2.8% fail on Fuel system (12 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 2.4% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device (24 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 0.40% fail on Pipe
- 0.81% fail on Doors
  - 0.40% fail on Driver's door
    - 0.40% fail on Door condition
  - 0.40% fail on Other passenger's door
    - 0.40% fail on Door condition
- 0.40% fail on Integral vehicle structure
  - 0.40% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
- 0.40% fail on Seats
  - 0.40% fail on Passenger's seat
- 0.40% fail on Boot lid
  - 0.40% fail on Other boot lid component
9.3% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks (150% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 9.3% fail on Exhaust emissions (160% worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 9.3% fail on Spark ignition (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    - 8.1% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (7 times worse than other 2009 cars)
    - 1.2% fail on Emissions not tested (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.40% fail on Fluid leaks
  - 0.40% fail on Engine oil leaks
8.9% fail on Visibility
- 6.5% fail on Wipers (150% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 2.4% fail on Washers
8.1% fail on Tyres
- 4.5% fail on Condition
- 4.0% fail on Tread depth
7.3% fail on Suspension (42% better than other 2009 cars)
- 2.4% fail on Anti-roll bars
  - 1.2% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
  - 0.81% fail on Pins and bushes (11 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 0.40% fail on Linkage ball joints
- 2.0% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas (31 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 1.6% fail on Shock absorbers
- 1.6% fail on Suspension arms
  - 1.6% fail on Ball joint
  - 0.40% fail on Ball joint dust cover
- 0.81% fail on Wheel bearings
2.4% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
- 1.6% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
- 0.81% fail on Seat belts
  - 0.81% fail on Condition
2.0% fail on Steering
- 1.2% fail on Steering gear (4 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 1.2% fail on Steering rack (5 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.81% fail on Power steering (8 times worse than other 2009 cars)
  - 0.81% fail on Operation (22 times worse than other 2009 cars)
0.40% fail on Road Wheels
- 0.40% fail on Attachment