MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » FIAT » Fiorino » 2010

FIAT Fiorino MOT Results

Registered in 2010
52.0% pass rate
from 818 tests in 2021
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 2010 vans and highlighted areas where the FIAT Fiorino is unusually good or bad.

  • 18% fail on Suspension
    • 8.8% fail on Springs (82% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 8.8% fail on Coil springs (190% worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 8.8% fail on Coil spring (200% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.8% fail on Suspension arms
      • 2.6% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.49% fail on Pins and bushes (78% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.49% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.24% fail on Suspension arm (5 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.24% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting (12 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 2.8% fail on Anti-roll bars (55% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.98% fail on Linkage ball joints (58% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.86% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 0.49% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.24% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.12% fail on Anti-roll bar
      • 0.12% fail on Linkage pins and bushes
    • 2.3% fail on Shock absorbers (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.3% fail on Macpherson strut (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.61% fail on Pins and bushes (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.49% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.24% fail on Macpherson strut (6 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.73% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.49% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 0.24% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.12% fail on Suspension rod
      • 0.12% fail on Ball joint
  • 17% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 5.6% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 4.2% fail on Headlamps
      • 4.2% fail on Headlamp
    • 3.5% fail on Stop lamp (38% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.1% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 2.9% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.12% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 2.7% fail on Direction indicators
      • 2.6% fail on Flashing type
        • 2.1% fail on Individual direction indicators
        • 0.37% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.24% fail on All direction indicators
      • 0.12% fail on Semaphore
        • 0.12% fail on Arm
    • 1.2% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 1.2% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 1.1% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 1.1% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 1.1% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 1.1% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.49% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.49% fail on Horn
      • 0.12% fail on Trailer electrical socket
    • 0.24% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.12% fail on All position lamps
      • 0.12% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.12% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.12% fail on Switch
  • 11% fail on Visibility
    • 7.8% fail on Washers (86% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.5% fail on Wipers
    • 0.49% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.49% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.49% fail on View to rear
      • 0.49% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.24% fail on Bonnet
  • 10% fail on Tyres (69% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 5.9% fail on Tread depth (59% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 5.0% fail on Condition (89% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.12% fail on Size/type
  • 9.3% fail on Brakes (37% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.1% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 2.1% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 2.1% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.98% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 0.98% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.37% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.37% fail on Lever
    • 2.4% fail on Brake performance (69% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.8% fail on Service brake performance
        • 1.6% fail on Rbt
          • 1.1% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.49% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.24% fail on Plate brake tester
          • 0.24% fail on Service brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles) (5 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.61% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (88% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.61% fail on Rbt (sp) (88% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.37% fail on Parking brake performance (81% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.37% fail on Rbt (80% better than other 2010 vans)
          • 0.37% fail on Parking brake performance (78% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 2.3% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 2.1% fail on Pedal (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.49% fail on Hand lever
    • 1.3% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 1.3% fail on Anti-lock braking system
    • 0.61% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.61% fail on Lever
    • 0.37% fail on Rigid brake pipes (90% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.24% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.12% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 0.12% fail on Servos
  • 4.2% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 4.0% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 3.1% fail on Compression ignition
        • 2.1% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.86% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
        • 0.12% fail on Emissions not tested
      • 0.98% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.98% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
    • 0.12% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.12% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 3.5% fail on Body, chassis, structure (55% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.6% fail on Fuel system (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.98% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.49% fail on Tank (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.12% fail on Hose
    • 0.98% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.73% fail on Transmission (81% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.61% fail on Drive shafts (82% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.49% fail on Joints (86% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.12% fail on Drive shaft
      • 0.12% fail on Belts
    • 0.37% fail on Doors
      • 0.37% fail on Front passenger's door
        • 0.37% fail on Door condition
    • 0.12% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 0.12% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 0.12% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.12% fail on Engine mounting
      • 0.12% fail on Engine mounting condition
  • 2.8% fail on Steering (47% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.6% fail on Steering linkage components (64% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.5% fail on Track rod end (64% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.12% fail on Locking devices
    • 1.1% fail on Steering gear
      • 0.73% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.37% fail on Operation (10 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.37% fail on Power steering
      • 0.24% fail on Other components
      • 0.12% fail on Pipes and hoses
    • 0.12% fail on Steering play
      • 0.12% fail on Steering rack
  • 0.61% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.61% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.61% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (75% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.49% fail on Seat belts (68% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.37% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.12% fail on Condition
    • 0.12% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.61% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.37% fail on Condition (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.24% fail on Attachment
  • 0.12% fail on Seat belt installation check
    • 0.12% fail on Anchorages