Dream car or Budget, which comes first? Tell us your thoughts | No thanks

FIAT Ducato MOT Results

Registered in 1992
52.9% pass rate
from 495 tests in 2017
Pass rate by mileage
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 1992 vans and highlighted areas where the FIAT Ducato is unusually good or bad.

  • 33% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (23% worse than other 1992 vans)
    • 11% fail on Headlamps (190% worse than other 1992 vans)
      • 11% fail on Headlamp (2 times worse than other 1992 vans)
      • 0.20% fail on Headlamp defects which don't require an aim check on retest
        • 0.20% fail on Main beam 'tell-tale'
      • 0.20% fail on Headlamp defects which do require an aim check on retest
        • 0.20% fail on Main beam 'tell-tale'
      • 0.20% fail on Dipswitch
    • 11% fail on Headlamp aim (82% worse than other 1992 vans)
    • 8.7% fail on Position lamps (69% worse than other 1992 vans)
      • 5.3% fail on Front lamps (110% worse than other 1992 vans)
      • 4.2% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.40% fail on All position lamps
    • 7.1% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 6.9% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 6.3% fail on Fog lamp
      • 1.0% fail on Tell tale
    • 6.9% fail on Direction indicators (65% worse than other 1992 vans)
      • 6.9% fail on Flashing type (65% worse than other 1992 vans)
        • 3.6% fail on Side repeaters (150% worse than other 1992 vans)
        • 3.0% fail on Individual lamps
        • 0.81% fail on All direction indicators
        • 0.20% fail on Tell tales
        • 0.20% fail on Switch
    • 4.0% fail on Battery
    • 3.4% fail on Stop lamp
    • 3.0% fail on Horn
    • 0.40% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.40% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 0.20% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.20% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.20% fail on Switch
  • 21% fail on Brakes
    • 13% fail on Brake performance
      • 9.1% fail on Rear wheels (47% worse than other 1992 vans)
      • 3.4% fail on Front wheels
      • 2.6% fail on Service brake performance
      • 2.6% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 0.61% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.20% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 12% fail on Hydraulic systems (53% worse than other 1992 vans)
      • 12% fail on Components (60% worse than other 1992 vans)
        • 7.3% fail on Pipes (82% worse than other 1992 vans)
        • 2.8% fail on Valves
        • 2.6% fail on Hoses
      • 1.4% fail on Leaks
      • 0.40% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp
      • 0.40% fail on Operation
    • 1.0% fail on Hub components
      • 0.81% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.20% fail on Brake pads
    • 0.61% fail on Parking brake
      • 0.61% fail on Condition
    • 0.40% fail on Restricted movement
    • 0.20% fail on Service brake control components
      • 0.20% fail on Pedal
        • 0.20% fail on Condition
    • 0.20% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 0.20% fail on Pressure/vacuum build up
  • 16% fail on Suspension
    • 8.1% fail on Drive shafts (58% worse than other 1992 vans)
      • 7.9% fail on Front drive shafts (58% worse than other 1992 vans)
        • 7.7% fail on Constant velocity joints (55% worse than other 1992 vans)
        • 0.20% fail on Couplings
      • 0.20% fail on Any drive shaft which is part of the suspension
        • 0.20% fail on Drive shafts
    • 6.5% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 5.1% fail on Component mounting
      • 1.4% fail on Spring mounting
      • 0.40% fail on Subframe mounting
    • 2.6% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 1.6% fail on Front
      • 1.0% fail on Rear
    • 1.2% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 0.81% fail on Suspension arms
      • 0.81% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.40% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 0.40% fail on Condition
    • 0.20% fail on Leaf springs
      • 0.20% fail on Condition
    • 0.20% fail on Front suspension retaining and locking devices
  • 13% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 6.9% fail on Wipers
    • 6.3% fail on Washers
    • 0.20% fail on Bonnet
    • 0.20% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.20% fail on Mirrors
  • 9.9% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 8.3% fail on Exhaust system
    • 1.0% fail on Emissions (67% better than other 1992 vans)
    • 0.81% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.40% fail on Hose
      • 0.40% fail on System
    • 0.61% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 5.9% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 2.4% fail on Body condition
    • 1.4% fail on Doors
      • 1.4% fail on Drivers (2 times worse than other 1992 vans)
    • 1.0% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 1.0% fail on Chassis
    • 0.61% fail on Engine mountings (3 times worse than other 1992 vans)
    • 0.61% fail on Seats
      • 0.40% fail on Passengers
      • 0.40% fail on Drivers
    • 0.20% fail on Body security
  • 4.2% fail on Steering
    • 3.8% fail on Steering system
      • 3.4% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.40% fail on Steering rack (80% better than other 1992 vans)
      • 0.20% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.20% fail on Drag link end
    • 0.40% fail on Steering control
      • 0.40% fail on Steering column
    • 0.20% fail on Power steering
      • 0.20% fail on Other components
  • 4.2% fail on Tyres
    • 3.0% fail on Condition
    • 1.2% fail on Tread depth
    • 0.40% fail on Size/type
  • 4.0% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 4.0% fail on Seat belts
      • 3.6% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.20% fail on Condition
      • 0.20% fail on Attachment
  • 0.81% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.81% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.40% fail on Towbars
    • 0.40% fail on Vehicle structure