Rover 400 MOT Results
Registered in 199949.7% pass rate
from 1,148 tests in 2017
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 1999 cars and highlighted areas where the Rover 400 is unusually good or bad.
-
25% fail on
Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
- 9.0% fail on Headlamp aim (34% worse than other 1999 cars)
- 6.1% fail on Stop lamp
-
5.3% fail on
Position lamps
- 3.0% fail on Front lamps (35% better than other 1999 cars)
- 2.6% fail on Rear lamps
-
4.4% fail on
Headlamps
- 4.4% fail on Headlamp
-
0.087% fail on
Headlamp defects which don't require an aim check on retest
- 0.087% fail on Main beam 'tell-tale'
- 4.0% fail on Registration plate lamp
-
3.0% fail on
Direction indicators
-
3.0% fail on
Flashing type
- 1.7% fail on Individual lamps
- 0.96% fail on Side repeaters
- 0.52% fail on All direction indicators
-
3.0% fail on
Flashing type
- 1.8% fail on Battery
-
0.87% fail on
Rear fog lamp
- 0.87% fail on Fog lamp
- 0.17% fail on Horn
- 0.17% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
- 0.087% fail on Electrical wiring
-
0.087% fail on
Hazard warning
- 0.087% fail on Switch
-
22% fail on
Suspension
-
12% fail on
Prescribed areas
(100% worse than other 1999 cars)
- 8.3% fail on Component mounting (72% worse than other 1999 cars)
- 4.4% fail on Subframe mounting (2 times worse than other 1999 cars)
-
9.1% fail on
Drive shafts
(130% worse than other 1999 cars)
-
9.1% fail on
Front drive shafts
(130% worse than other 1999 cars)
- 9.1% fail on Constant velocity joints (140% worse than other 1999 cars)
-
0.087% fail on
Any drive shaft which is part of the suspension
- 0.087% fail on Drive shafts
-
9.1% fail on
Front drive shafts
(130% worse than other 1999 cars)
-
2.2% fail on
Trailing arms
(3 times worse than other 1999 cars)
- 2.2% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (4 times worse than other 1999 cars)
-
1.4% fail on
Suspension arms
(66% better than other 1999 cars)
- 1.2% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (69% better than other 1999 cars)
- 0.087% fail on Condition
- 0.087% fail on Attachment
-
0.70% fail on
Wheel bearings
(62% better than other 1999 cars)
- 0.70% fail on Rear
- 0.61% fail on Front suspension joints (59% better than other 1999 cars)
-
0.52% fail on
Anti-roll bars
(89% better than other 1999 cars)
- 0.26% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (92% better than other 1999 cars)
- 0.26% fail on Linkage condition
-
0.44% fail on
Shock absorbers
(72% better than other 1999 cars)
- 0.44% fail on Condition (72% better than other 1999 cars)
-
0.35% fail on
Radius arms
- 0.35% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
-
0.087% fail on
Tie bars/rods
- 0.087% fail on Condition
- 0.087% fail on Front suspension retaining and locking devices
-
12% fail on
Prescribed areas
(100% worse than other 1999 cars)
-
18% fail on
Brakes
-
12% fail on
Brake performance
(30% worse than other 1999 cars)
- 6.8% fail on Front wheels (110% worse than other 1999 cars)
- 5.2% fail on Rear wheels
- 3.0% fail on Parking brake performance (36% better than other 1999 cars)
- 2.3% fail on Service brake performance
- 1.2% fail on Brake imbalance
- 0.26% fail on Brake performance not tested
- 0.087% fail on Brake operation
-
4.4% fail on
Hydraulic systems
(35% better than other 1999 cars)
-
4.1% fail on
Components
(34% better than other 1999 cars)
- 3.9% fail on Pipes
- 0.087% fail on Cylinders
- 0.087% fail on Hoses
- 0.087% fail on Reservoirs
- 0.26% fail on Leaks
-
4.1% fail on
Components
(34% better than other 1999 cars)
-
2.8% fail on
Hub components
- 2.4% fail on Brake pads
- 0.26% fail on Brake discs
- 0.17% fail on Wheel cylinder
- 1.7% fail on ABS
- 0.44% fail on Restricted movement
-
0.26% fail on
Parking brake
(74% better than other 1999 cars)
- 0.26% fail on Condition (74% better than other 1999 cars)
-
0.087% fail on
Service brake control components
-
0.087% fail on
Pedal
- 0.087% fail on Anti-slip
-
0.087% fail on
Pedal
-
12% fail on
Brake performance
(30% worse than other 1999 cars)
-
13% fail on
Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
- 8.3% fail on Emissions
- 5.2% fail on Exhaust system
- 2.2% fail on Emissions not tested (97% worse than other 1999 cars)
-
0.87% fail on
Fuel system
- 0.35% fail on Cap
- 0.17% fail on Tank
- 0.17% fail on System
- 0.087% fail on Hose
- 0.087% fail on Pipe
-
9.2% fail on
Driver's view of the road
- 5.3% fail on Wipers
- 3.9% fail on Washers
- 0.44% fail on Windscreen
- 0.17% fail on Mirrors
- 0.087% fail on Bonnet
-
9.0% fail on
Tyres
- 5.4% fail on Tread depth
- 4.0% fail on Condition
- 0.17% fail on Size/type
- 0.087% fail on Valve stem
-
4.7% fail on
Body, Structure and General Items
- 2.4% fail on Body condition
-
1.7% fail on
Vehicle structure
- 1.7% fail on Chassis
-
0.35% fail on
Doors
- 0.35% fail on Passengers other
- 0.087% fail on Engine mountings
-
0.087% fail on
Seats
- 0.087% fail on Passengers
-
0.087% fail on
Load security
- 0.087% fail on Tailgate
-
4.3% fail on
Steering
-
3.0% fail on
Steering system
- 2.1% fail on Track rod end
- 0.70% fail on Steering rack
- 0.17% fail on Ball joint
-
1.1% fail on
Power steering
- 0.78% fail on Operation (3 times worse than other 1999 cars)
- 0.26% fail on Pipes and hoses
- 0.17% fail on Other components
- 0.087% fail on Rams
- 0.17% fail on Locking devices
-
3.0% fail on
Steering system
-
3.6% fail on
Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
(34% better than other 1999 cars)
-
3.5% fail on
Seat belts
- 2.9% fail on Prescribed areas
- 0.70% fail on Condition
- 0.087% fail on Requirements
- 0.087% fail on Attachment
-
0.17% fail on
Supplementary restraint systems
(90% better than other 1999 cars)
- 0.17% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp (89% better than other 1999 cars)
-
3.5% fail on
Seat belts
-
0.96% fail on
Registration plates and VIN
- 0.96% fail on Registration plate
-
0.26% fail on
Road Wheels
- 0.17% fail on Condition
- 0.087% fail on Attachment
Read the Honest John Review
-
Rover 400 (1995 - 1999)
Rover's version of the Honda Civic. Quite well equipped and a reasonable drive in its day.