MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Toyota » MR2 » 1989

Toyota MR2 MOT Results

Registered in 1989
69.8% pass rate
from 368 tests in 2020
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 1989 cars and highlighted areas where the Toyota MR2 is unusually good or bad.

  • 15% fail on Suspension (48% worse than other 1989 cars)
    • 10% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas (140% worse than other 1989 cars)
    • 3.5% fail on Anti-roll bars (3 times worse than other 1989 cars)
      • 1.1% fail on Linkage ball joints (13 times worse than other 1989 cars)
      • 0.54% fail on Ball joint dust cover (9 times worse than other 1989 cars)
      • 0.54% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 0.27% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.27% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.27% fail on Linkage
      • 0.27% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
      • 0.27% fail on Linkage attachment bracket and mounting
    • 3.3% fail on Suspension arms
      • 1.6% fail on Ball joint
      • 1.1% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.82% fail on Suspension arm (4 times worse than other 1989 cars)
    • 0.82% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 0.54% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.54% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.27% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.27% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.27% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.27% fail on Sub-frame
  • 13% fail on Brakes
    • 12% fail on Brake performance (55% worse than other 1989 cars)
      • 7.9% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (160% worse than other 1989 cars)
        • 7.9% fail on Rbt (sp) (180% worse than other 1989 cars)
      • 4.6% fail on Parking brake performance (2 times worse than other 1989 cars)
        • 4.3% fail on Rbt (2 times worse than other 1989 cars)
          • 3.5% fail on Parking brake performance (2 times worse than other 1989 cars)
          • 0.54% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
          • 0.27% fail on Parking brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
        • 0.27% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.27% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
      • 3.5% fail on Service brake performance
        • 3.5% fail on Rbt
          • 3.0% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.82% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 3.3% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 3.3% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 2.2% fail on Service brake imbalance
          • 1.6% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.27% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 1.9% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 1.1% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 1.1% fail on Brake pads
      • 1.1% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.1% fail on Brake discs
    • 1.6% fail on Parking brake control (3 times worse than other 1989 cars)
      • 1.6% fail on Lever (3 times worse than other 1989 cars)
    • 0.82% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.54% fail on Hand lever
      • 0.27% fail on Pedal
    • 0.54% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 0.54% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.54% fail on Hydraulic brake callipers
    • 0.27% fail on Flexible brake hoses
  • 9.5% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (40% better than other 1989 cars)
    • 4.1% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 4.1% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 2.2% fail on Headlamps
      • 2.2% fail on Headlamp
    • 1.6% fail on Stop lamp
    • 1.4% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.54% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.54% fail on Horn
      • 0.27% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 1.1% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.82% fail on Position lamp
      • 0.27% fail on All position lamps
    • 0.82% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (77% better than other 1989 cars)
      • 0.82% fail on Rear fog lamp (77% better than other 1989 cars)
        • 0.82% fail on Rear fog lamp (76% better than other 1989 cars)
    • 0.27% fail on Direction indicators
      • 0.27% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.27% fail on Side repeaters
    • 0.27% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 0.27% fail on Mandatory tell-tales
      • 0.27% fail on Main beam tell-tale
  • 9.0% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 3.0% fail on Exhaust system
    • 2.7% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 2.7% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 2.2% fail on Chassis
      • 2.2% fail on Chassis condition
    • 1.4% fail on Body
      • 0.82% fail on Panel
      • 0.54% fail on Other body component
      • 0.27% fail on Body condition
    • 1.4% fail on Floor (4 times worse than other 1989 cars)
    • 0.54% fail on Seats
      • 0.54% fail on Driver's seat
    • 0.27% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.27% fail on Hose
    • 0.27% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.27% fail on Engine mounting
      • 0.27% fail on Bracket
    • 0.27% fail on Doors
      • 0.27% fail on Driver's door
        • 0.27% fail on Hinge
    • 0.27% fail on Cabs
      • 0.27% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 5.4% fail on Visibility
    • 2.7% fail on Wipers
    • 2.2% fail on Washers
    • 0.82% fail on Condition of glass (5 times worse than other 1989 cars)
      • 0.82% fail on Windscreen (5 times worse than other 1989 cars)
    • 0.27% fail on Bonnet
  • 3.3% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 3.3% fail on Seat belts
      • 3.0% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.27% fail on Requirements
  • 3.3% fail on Tyres
    • 1.9% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.1% fail on Condition
    • 0.54% fail on Size/type
  • 2.4% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 2.2% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 2.2% fail on Spark ignition
        • 1.6% fail on Non catalyst emissions
        • 0.54% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.54% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.54% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 0.27% fail on Steering
    • 0.27% fail on Steering gear
      • 0.27% fail on Steering rack

Search Good Garages