Volkswagen Polo MOT Results
Registered in 199553.9% pass rate
from 317 tests in 2021
(26% worse than other 1995 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 1995 cars and highlighted areas where the Volkswagen Polo is unusually good or bad.
-
19% fail on
Brakes
(67% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
7.9% fail on
Brake performance
-
4.7% fail on
Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
-
4.7% fail on
Rbt (sp)
- 3.2% fail on Service brake imbalance
- 1.6% fail on Service brake performance
-
4.7% fail on
Rbt (sp)
-
3.2% fail on
Service brake performance
-
3.2% fail on
Rbt
- 1.6% fail on Service brake performance
- 1.6% fail on Service brake imbalance
-
3.2% fail on
Rbt
-
1.9% fail on
Parking brake efficiency (sp)
- 1.9% fail on Rbt (sp)
-
0.63% fail on
Parking brake performance
-
0.63% fail on
Rbt
- 0.32% fail on Parking brake performance
- 0.32% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
-
0.63% fail on
Rbt
- 0.32% fail on Brake performance not tested
-
4.7% fail on
Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
- 5.7% fail on Rigid brake pipes (130% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 2.8% fail on Load sensing valves (17 times worse than other 1995 cars)
-
2.5% fail on
Mechanical brake components
-
1.6% fail on
Brake linings and pads
- 1.6% fail on Brake pads
-
0.63% fail on
Brake discs and drums
- 0.32% fail on Brake discs
- 0.32% fail on Brake drums
-
0.32% fail on
Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
- 0.32% fail on Cable
- 0.32% fail on Lever
-
1.6% fail on
Brake linings and pads
-
1.6% fail on
Hydraulic systems
(4 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.63% fail on Brake fluid
- 0.63% fail on Valves (9 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.32% fail on Reservoirs
- 0.63% fail on Flexible brake hoses
-
0.63% fail on
Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
- 0.63% fail on Hydraulic brake cylinder (6 times worse than other 1995 cars)
-
0.63% fail on
ABS / EBS / ESC
- 0.63% fail on Anti-lock braking system
-
7.9% fail on
Brake performance
-
17% fail on
Suspension
(49% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
6.3% fail on
Suspension arms
(110% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 5.0% fail on Pins and bushes (2 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 1.3% fail on Suspension arm (5 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.32% fail on Ball joint
- 0.32% fail on Ball joint dust cover
- 6.3% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
- 6.0% fail on Wheel bearings (2 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 1.6% fail on Shock absorbers
-
1.6% fail on
Macpherson strut
(8 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.63% fail on Macpherson strut (15 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.63% fail on Pins and bushes (7 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.32% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
-
0.95% fail on
Sub-frames
- 0.63% fail on Sub-frame mounting prescribed areas
- 0.32% fail on Sub-frame
-
0.63% fail on
Other suspension component
- 0.32% fail on Ball joint
- 0.32% fail on Ball joint dust cover
-
6.3% fail on
Suspension arms
(110% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
11% fail on
Noise, emissions and leaks
-
11% fail on
Exhaust emissions
(60% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
11% fail on
Spark ignition
(72% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 8.8% fail on Catalyst emissions (81% worse than other 1995 cars)
- 1.9% fail on Emissions not tested
-
0.32% fail on
Emission control equipment
- 0.32% fail on Catalytic converter
- 0.32% fail on Non catalyst emissions
-
0.32% fail on
Compression ignition
- 0.32% fail on Emissions not tested
-
11% fail on
Spark ignition
(72% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
0.32% fail on
Fluid leaks
- 0.32% fail on Engine oil leaks
-
11% fail on
Exhaust emissions
(60% worse than other 1995 cars)
-
11% fail on
Body, chassis, structure
- 4.1% fail on Exhaust system
-
2.2% fail on
Chassis
- 2.2% fail on Chassis condition
-
1.9% fail on
Transmission
-
1.9% fail on
Drive shafts
- 1.9% fail on Joints
-
1.9% fail on
Drive shafts
-
1.3% fail on
Integral vehicle structure
- 1.3% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
-
0.63% fail on
Engine mounting
(10 times worse than other 1995 cars)
- 0.63% fail on Engine mounting condition (15 times worse than other 1995 cars)
-
0.63% fail on
Doors
-
0.63% fail on
Other passenger's door
- 0.32% fail on Door condition
- 0.32% fail on Catch
-
0.63% fail on
Other passenger's door
-
0.63% fail on
Seats
- 0.63% fail on Passenger's seat
-
0.32% fail on
Fuel system
- 0.32% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
-
0.32% fail on
Body
- 0.32% fail on Other body component
- 0.32% fail on Floor
-
10% fail on
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
- 4.1% fail on Stop lamp
-
3.2% fail on
Headlamp aim
- 3.2% fail on Headlamp aim
-
0.95% fail on
Direction indicators
-
0.95% fail on
Flashing type
- 0.95% fail on Individual direction indicators
-
0.95% fail on
Flashing type
-
0.95% fail on
Electrical equipment
- 0.95% fail on Horn
-
0.63% fail on
Mandatory tell-tales
- 0.63% fail on Rear fog lamp tell-tale
-
0.32% fail on
Headlamps
- 0.32% fail on Headlamp
-
0.32% fail on
Front and rear fog lamps
-
0.32% fail on
Rear fog lamp
- 0.32% fail on Rear fog lamp
-
0.32% fail on
Rear fog lamp
- 0.32% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
-
6.3% fail on
Visibility
- 5.0% fail on Wipers
- 2.2% fail on Washers
-
5.0% fail on
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
-
4.7% fail on
Seat belts
- 3.2% fail on Prescribed areas
- 1.9% fail on Condition (2 times worse than other 1995 cars)
-
0.32% fail on
Airbags
- 0.32% fail on Drivers airbag
- 0.32% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
-
4.7% fail on
Seat belts
-
4.7% fail on
Tyres
- 2.8% fail on Tread depth
- 2.5% fail on Condition
-
2.8% fail on
Steering
-
1.3% fail on
Steering gear
- 1.3% fail on Steering rack
-
1.3% fail on
Steering linkage components
- 0.95% fail on Track rod end
- 0.32% fail on Locking devices
-
0.32% fail on
Power steering
- 0.32% fail on Pipes and hoses
-
1.3% fail on
Steering gear
-
1.6% fail on
Identification of the vehicle
- 1.6% fail on Registration plates
Read the Honest John Review
-
Volkswagen Polo (1994 - 1999)
Competent hatchback with a comfortable ride and a classier image than it deserves.