MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Rover » CityRover » 2005

Rover CityRover MOT Results

Registered in 2005
40.2% pass rate
from 112 tests in 2020
(28% worse than other 2005 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 2005 cars and highlighted areas where the Rover CityRover is unusually good or bad.

  • 29% fail on Suspension (68% worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 8.9% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 6.3% fail on Linkage (14 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.89% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
      • 0.89% fail on Linkage ball joints
      • 0.89% fail on Linkage attachment bracket and mounting
    • 8.0% fail on Suspension arms
      • 6.3% fail on Ball joint
      • 1.8% fail on Suspension arm (6 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 6.3% fail on Wheel bearings (3 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 6.3% fail on Shock absorbers (3 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 2.7% fail on Springs
      • 2.7% fail on Coil springs
        • 1.8% fail on Coil spring
        • 0.89% fail on Mounting
    • 2.7% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 0.89% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.89% fail on Macpherson strut
    • 0.89% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.89% fail on Ball joint
  • 29% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 13% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (12 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 13% fail on Rear fog lamp (12 times worse than other 2005 cars)
        • 13% fail on Rear fog lamp (12 times worse than other 2005 cars)
        • 2.7% fail on Switch (77 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 7.1% fail on Headlamps
      • 7.1% fail on Headlamp
      • 0.89% fail on Headlamp levelling device
    • 5.4% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 5.4% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 4.5% fail on Stop lamp
    • 3.6% fail on Direction indicators
      • 3.6% fail on Flashing type
        • 2.7% fail on Individual direction indicators
        • 0.89% fail on Switch
    • 2.7% fail on Mandatory tell-tales (71 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 2.7% fail on Rear fog lamp tell-tale (107 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 1.8% fail on Position lamps
      • 1.8% fail on Position lamp
    • 1.8% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 1.8% fail on Horn
  • 21% fail on Brakes
    • 17% fail on Brake performance (140% worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 12% fail on Service brake performance (3 times worse than other 2005 cars)
        • 12% fail on Rbt (3 times worse than other 2005 cars)
          • 12% fail on Service brake performance (3 times worse than other 2005 cars)
          • 1.8% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 8.0% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp) (8 times worse than other 2005 cars)
        • 8.0% fail on Rbt (sp) (8 times worse than other 2005 cars)
          • 6.3% fail on Service brake imbalance (8 times worse than other 2005 cars)
          • 2.7% fail on Service brake performance (10 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.89% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 0.89% fail on Rbt (sp)
    • 8.9% fail on Rigid brake pipes (2 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 2.7% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 1.8% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.8% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.89% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.89% fail on Cable
    • 0.89% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.89% fail on Pedal
    • 0.89% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.89% fail on Reservoirs
  • 13% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 6.3% fail on Exhaust system
    • 2.7% fail on Fuel system (4 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Hose (92 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.89% fail on System
    • 1.8% fail on Transmission
      • 1.8% fail on Drive shafts
        • 1.8% fail on Joints
    • 0.89% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 0.89% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 0.89% fail on Body
      • 0.89% fail on Other body component
    • 0.89% fail on Seats
      • 0.89% fail on Passenger's seat
  • 12% fail on Visibility
    • 7.1% fail on Wipers
    • 4.5% fail on Washers
    • 1.8% fail on View to rear (5 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Mirrors (5 times worse than other 2005 cars)
    • 0.89% fail on Driver's view
    • 0.89% fail on Bonnet
  • 9.8% fail on Tyres
    • 6.3% fail on Condition
    • 2.7% fail on Tread depth
    • 0.89% fail on Size/type
  • 7.1% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 5.4% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 5.4% fail on Spark ignition
        • 2.7% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 1.8% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 1.8% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 1.8% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 1.8% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 6.3% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 3.6% fail on Seat belts
      • 1.8% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.89% fail on Requirements
      • 0.89% fail on Condition
    • 3.6% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 4.5% fail on Steering
    • 2.7% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 1.8% fail on Ball joint (8 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.89% fail on Track rod end
    • 1.8% fail on Power steering (5 times worse than other 2005 cars)
      • 0.89% fail on Operation
      • 0.89% fail on Other components
  • 0.89% fail on Buses and coaches supplementary tests
    • 0.89% fail on Doors
      • 0.89% fail on Emergency exits

Search Good Garages