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

Mazda B2500 MOT Results

Registered in 2005
52.2% pass rate
from 477 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 2005 vans and highlighted areas where the Mazda B2500 is unusually good or bad.

  • 29% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 13% fail on Rear fog lamp (3 times worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 13% fail on Fog lamp (3 times worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.42% fail on Tell tale
    • 8.2% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 7.5% fail on Position lamps
      • 5.0% fail on Front lamps
      • 3.1% fail on Rear lamps
    • 5.9% fail on Registration plate lamp (45% better than other 2005 vans)
    • 5.5% fail on Stop lamp
    • 4.0% fail on Direction indicators
      • 4.0% fail on Flashing type
        • 1.9% fail on Side repeaters
        • 1.7% fail on Individual lamps
        • 0.42% fail on All direction indicators
    • 3.4% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.4% fail on Headlamp
    • 1.0% fail on Battery
    • 0.84% fail on Trailer electrical socket (2 times worse than other 2005 vans)
    • 0.63% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.63% fail on Horn
    • 0.21% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.21% fail on Lamp
  • 22% fail on Suspension
    • 9.6% fail on Drive shafts (150% worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 9.2% fail on Front drive shafts (150% worse than other 2005 vans)
        • 9.2% fail on Constant velocity joints (150% worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.42% fail on Any drive shaft which is part of the suspension
        • 0.21% fail on Universal joint
        • 0.21% fail on Drive shafts
    • 4.4% fail on Shock absorbers (130% worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 4.4% fail on Condition (130% worse than other 2005 vans)
    • 4.0% fail on Suspension arms
      • 3.6% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.21% fail on Condition
      • 0.21% fail on Attachment
    • 4.0% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 2.3% fail on Spring mounting
      • 1.9% fail on Component mounting
    • 3.4% fail on Anti-roll bars (47% better than other 2005 vans)
      • 1.7% fail on Linkage condition (2 times worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.84% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (80% better than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.42% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.21% fail on Condition
      • 0.21% fail on Attachment
    • 2.1% fail on Leaf springs
      • 1.9% fail on Condition (3 times worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.21% fail on Shackle bracket
    • 0.63% fail on Front suspension joints (74% better than other 2005 vans)
    • 0.21% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.21% fail on Front
    • 0.21% fail on Front suspension retaining and locking devices
  • 18% fail on Brakes
    • 10% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 9.9% fail on Components
        • 6.3% fail on Pipes
        • 3.6% fail on Valves (2 times worse than other 2005 vans)
        • 1.3% fail on Hoses
      • 0.84% fail on Leaks
      • 0.42% fail on Operation
    • 6.5% fail on Brake performance (39% better than other 2005 vans)
      • 4.4% fail on Front wheels
      • 0.84% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.42% fail on Rear wheels (92% better than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.42% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.42% fail on Parking brake performance (93% better than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.42% fail on Brake operation (8 times worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.42% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 2.7% fail on Hub components
      • 1.9% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.42% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.21% fail on Brake back plates
      • 0.21% fail on Brake calipers
    • 1.5% fail on ABS
    • 0.63% fail on Restricted movement
    • 0.21% fail on Mechanical components
      • 0.21% fail on Cable
    • 0.21% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.21% fail on Actuating linkage mounting
  • 8.4% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 5.2% fail on Wipers
    • 2.7% fail on Washers
    • 1.0% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.42% fail on Mirrors
  • 4.2% fail on Tyres (48% better than other 2005 vans)
    • 2.9% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.3% fail on Condition (63% better than other 2005 vans)
    • 0.21% fail on Valve stem
  • 4.2% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 2.7% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.84% fail on Emissions
    • 0.84% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.84% fail on Pipe (3 times worse than other 2005 vans)
    • 0.21% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 3.8% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 1.9% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 1.9% fail on Chassis
    • 1.9% fail on Body condition
    • 0.21% fail on Seats
      • 0.21% fail on Passengers
  • 3.1% fail on Steering (51% better than other 2005 vans)
    • 3.1% fail on Steering system
      • 1.0% fail on Track rod end (73% better than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.63% fail on Other components (6 times worse than other 2005 vans)
        • 0.63% fail on Steering pivot point (7 times worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.42% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.42% fail on Drag link end
      • 0.21% fail on Steering box
      • 0.21% fail on Lock stop
      • 0.21% fail on Steering arm
  • 2.9% fail on Registration plates and VIN (160% worse than other 2005 vans)
    • 2.9% fail on Registration plate (170% worse than other 2005 vans)
  • 1.3% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems (74% better than other 2005 vans)
    • 0.84% fail on Seat belts (73% better than other 2005 vans)
      • 0.42% fail on Condition
      • 0.42% fail on Prescribed areas (81% better than other 2005 vans)
    • 0.42% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 0.42% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
  • 0.84% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.84% fail on Attachment