MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » FIAT » Scudo » 2000
Dream car or Budget, which comes first? Tell us your thoughts | No thanks

FIAT Scudo MOT Results

Registered in 2000
46.2% pass rate
from 749 tests in 2017
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 2000 vans and highlighted areas where the FIAT Scudo is unusually good or bad.

  • 31% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 11% fail on Position lamps (57% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 7.3% fail on Front lamps (56% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 4.3% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.27% fail on All position lamps
    • 10% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 6.0% fail on Stop lamp
    • 5.7% fail on Direction indicators (57% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 5.7% fail on Flashing type (57% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 4.8% fail on Individual lamps (98% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 0.67% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.27% fail on All direction indicators
        • 0.13% fail on Switch
    • 5.1% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 4.7% fail on Headlamps
      • 4.7% fail on Headlamp
    • 1.9% fail on Rear fog lamp (56% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.9% fail on Fog lamp (54% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.5% fail on Horn
    • 0.93% fail on Battery
    • 0.27% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.13% fail on Lamp
      • 0.13% fail on Switch
    • 0.13% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.13% fail on Trailer electrical socket
    • 0.13% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.13% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
  • 28% fail on Suspension (19% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 9.9% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 5.9% fail on Subframe mounting (180% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 4.7% fail on Component mounting
      • 0.53% fail on Spring mounting (87% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 9.5% fail on Suspension arms (150% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 9.5% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (160% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.13% fail on Attachment
    • 5.2% fail on Drive shafts
      • 5.2% fail on Front drive shafts
        • 5.2% fail on Constant velocity joints
    • 4.0% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 3.9% fail on Sub-frames (11 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 3.6% fail on Condition (14 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.13% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.13% fail on Attachment
    • 2.4% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 2.4% fail on Condition
    • 1.6% fail on Trailing arms (11 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.3% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (10 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.27% fail on Attachment (22 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.1% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.93% fail on Front
      • 0.13% fail on Rear
    • 0.80% fail on Coil springs
      • 0.53% fail on Condition
      • 0.27% fail on Location (6 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.53% fail on Radius arms (8 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.53% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (9 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.53% fail on Panhard rods (14 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.27% fail on Condition (10 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.27% fail on Attachment (22 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.27% fail on Tie bars/rods
      • 0.13% fail on Condition
      • 0.13% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.27% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.27% fail on Condition
    • 0.13% fail on Bonded suspension
      • 0.13% fail on Condition
    • 0.13% fail on Torque/reaction arms
      • 0.13% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.13% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 0.13% fail on Linkage condition
    • 0.13% fail on Axles
      • 0.13% fail on Swivel joints/housing
  • 21% fail on Brakes
    • 12% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 11% fail on Components
        • 4.9% fail on Pipes
        • 3.9% fail on Valves
        • 3.5% fail on Hoses (72% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 0.67% fail on Reservoirs
        • 0.13% fail on Servos
      • 0.40% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp
      • 0.13% fail on Operation
    • 9.9% fail on Brake performance
      • 4.8% fail on Front wheels
      • 4.3% fail on Rear wheels
      • 2.0% fail on Service brake performance
      • 1.6% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 1.1% fail on Parking brake performance (80% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 3.1% fail on Hub components
      • 1.6% fail on Brake discs
      • 1.3% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.13% fail on Brake linings
      • 0.13% fail on Brake drums
      • 0.13% fail on Brake calipers
      • 0.13% fail on Wheel cylinder
    • 0.67% fail on Parking brake
      • 0.67% fail on Condition
    • 0.67% fail on Service brake control components
      • 0.67% fail on Pedal
        • 0.40% fail on Anti-slip
        • 0.27% fail on Condition
    • 0.40% fail on Mechanical components
      • 0.40% fail on Cable
    • 0.27% fail on ABS
    • 0.13% fail on Restricted movement
  • 13% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 8.1% fail on Wipers
    • 4.4% fail on Washers
    • 1.9% fail on Mirrors (120% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.53% fail on Windscreen
  • 12% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions (36% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 10% fail on Exhaust system (79% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.5% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 1.2% fail on Emissions
    • 0.53% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.40% fail on System
      • 0.13% fail on Pipe
  • 10% fail on Tyres (39% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 5.5% fail on Tread depth
    • 5.2% fail on Condition (55% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.40% fail on Size/type
  • 9.9% fail on Steering
    • 8.3% fail on Steering system
      • 4.8% fail on Track rod end
      • 2.4% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.80% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.27% fail on Free play
        • 0.27% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.27% fail on Steering arm
    • 2.0% fail on Power steering (120% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.80% fail on Other components (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.67% fail on Operation
      • 0.53% fail on Rams (15 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.27% fail on Pipes and hoses
      • 0.13% fail on Pump
    • 0.13% fail on Steering control
      • 0.13% fail on Steering lock
    • 0.13% fail on Steering operation
    • 0.13% fail on Locking devices
    • 0.13% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 6.5% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 2.7% fail on Body condition
    • 2.3% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 2.3% fail on Chassis
    • 1.5% fail on Doors
      • 0.93% fail on Passengers other (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.27% fail on Drivers
      • 0.27% fail on Passengers front
    • 0.27% fail on Seats
      • 0.13% fail on Passengers
      • 0.13% fail on Drivers
    • 0.27% fail on Spare wheel
    • 0.13% fail on Engine mountings
    • 0.13% fail on Speedometer
    • 0.13% fail on Load security
      • 0.13% fail on Tailgate
  • 2.8% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems (51% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 2.8% fail on Seat belts (46% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.7% fail on Condition
      • 0.67% fail on Prescribed areas (83% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.53% fail on Requirements
      • 0.13% fail on Attachment
  • 0.67% fail on Towbars
    • 0.40% fail on Vehicle structure
    • 0.27% fail on Towbar
  • 0.40% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.40% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.27% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.27% fail on Attachment