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

Mazda Bongo MOT Results

Registered in 1995
43.7% pass rate
from 1,887 tests in 2017
(15% worse than other 1995 vans)
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 1995 vans and highlighted areas where the Mazda Bongo is unusually good or bad.

  • 33% fail on Suspension (46% worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 19% fail on Prescribed areas (57% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 16% fail on Component mounting (81% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 4.1% fail on Subframe mounting (86% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 2.0% fail on Spring mounting (40% better than other 1995 vans)
    • 15% fail on Anti-roll bars (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 9.8% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 3.8% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (180% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 2.3% fail on Attachment (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 1.7% fail on Linkage condition (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.32% fail on Condition (4 times worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 4.7% fail on Suspension arms (55% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 4.5% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (57% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.21% fail on Attachment
    • 2.6% fail on Drive shafts
      • 2.6% fail on Front drive shafts
        • 2.6% fail on Constant velocity joints
        • 0.053% fail on Couplings
    • 2.2% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 0.37% fail on Shock absorbers (79% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.37% fail on Condition (79% better than other 1995 vans)
    • 0.32% fail on Wheel bearings (81% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.26% fail on Front (76% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.053% fail on Rear
    • 0.16% fail on Coil springs (80% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.11% fail on Location
      • 0.053% fail on Condition
    • 0.16% fail on Tie bars/rods
      • 0.11% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.053% fail on Attachment
    • 0.16% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.11% fail on Condition
      • 0.053% fail on Attachment
  • 31% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (12% worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 14% fail on Rear fog lamp (99% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 13% fail on Fog lamp (97% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 1.2% fail on Tell tale (110% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.48% fail on Switch (180% worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 6.0% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 5.8% fail on Stop lamp
    • 5.6% fail on Position lamps
      • 3.9% fail on Front lamps
      • 1.8% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.053% fail on All position lamps
    • 5.5% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 5.5% fail on Headlamps
      • 5.4% fail on Headlamp
      • 0.053% fail on Matched pair
      • 0.053% fail on Dipswitch
    • 3.0% fail on Battery
    • 1.6% fail on Horn (54% better than other 1995 vans)
    • 1.4% fail on Direction indicators (59% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 1.4% fail on Flashing type (59% better than other 1995 vans)
        • 0.85% fail on Individual lamps (51% better than other 1995 vans)
        • 0.37% fail on Side repeaters (69% better than other 1995 vans)
        • 0.11% fail on All direction indicators
        • 0.11% fail on Tell tales
    • 0.37% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.21% fail on Trailer electrical socket
    • 0.053% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.053% fail on Lamp
  • 13% fail on Brakes (28% better than other 1995 vans)
    • 6.8% fail on Brake performance (41% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 3.2% fail on Front wheels (39% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 2.1% fail on Parking brake performance (40% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 2.0% fail on Rear wheels (59% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 1.0% fail on Service brake performance (64% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.37% fail on Brake imbalance (64% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.16% fail on Brake performance not tested
      • 0.053% fail on Parking brake operation
      • 0.053% fail on Brake operation
    • 3.3% fail on Hub components (84% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 2.2% fail on Brake pads (110% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 1.1% fail on Brake discs (86% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.32% fail on Brake calipers
    • 3.0% fail on Hydraulic systems (58% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 2.6% fail on Components (60% better than other 1995 vans)
        • 2.3% fail on Pipes (40% better than other 1995 vans)
        • 0.37% fail on Hoses (80% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.16% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp
      • 0.16% fail on Leaks
      • 0.11% fail on Operation
    • 0.74% fail on Parking brake
      • 0.74% fail on Condition
    • 0.69% fail on ABS (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 0.21% fail on Service brake control components (68% better than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.21% fail on Pedal (68% better than other 1995 vans)
        • 0.11% fail on Condition
        • 0.11% fail on Anti-slip
    • 0.16% fail on Restricted movement
  • 11% fail on Body, Structure and General Items (26% worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 6.3% fail on Body condition (38% worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 4.0% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 4.0% fail on Chassis
    • 0.64% fail on Seats
      • 0.42% fail on Passengers
      • 0.32% fail on Drivers
    • 0.42% fail on Doors
      • 0.32% fail on Passengers other
      • 0.11% fail on Drivers
    • 0.11% fail on Body security
    • 0.053% fail on Speedometer
    • 0.053% fail on Load security
      • 0.053% fail on Access panel
    • 0.053% fail on Spare wheel
  • 11% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 6.8% fail on Wipers
    • 3.3% fail on Washers
    • 0.69% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.32% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.053% fail on Bonnet
  • 9.3% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 5.6% fail on Exhaust system
    • 2.6% fail on Fuel system (46% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 2.1% fail on System (110% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.32% fail on Cap
      • 0.16% fail on Pipe
      • 0.053% fail on Tank
    • 1.4% fail on Emissions
    • 0.74% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 8.5% fail on Steering (25% worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 6.0% fail on Steering system
      • 3.3% fail on Track rod end
      • 2.4% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.37% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.21% fail on Free play
        • 0.21% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.053% fail on Drag link end
    • 2.4% fail on Power steering (94% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 1.9% fail on Other components (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.37% fail on Pipes and hoses
      • 0.16% fail on Rams (4 times worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 0.16% fail on Steering control
      • 0.11% fail on Steering coupling
        • 0.11% fail on Universal joint
      • 0.053% fail on Steering wheel
    • 0.11% fail on Steering operation
    • 0.11% fail on Locking devices
    • 0.053% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 7.3% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 7.3% fail on Seat belts
      • 6.5% fail on Prescribed areas (26% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 0.79% fail on Condition
      • 0.26% fail on Requirements
      • 0.11% fail on Attachment
      • 0.053% fail on Installation check
        • 0.053% fail on Belt(s)/padding
  • 5.6% fail on Tyres
    • 2.9% fail on Tread depth
    • 2.3% fail on Condition
    • 0.26% fail on Size/type
    • 0.26% fail on Valve stem
  • 2.1% fail on Towbars (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 2.0% fail on Vehicle structure (3 times worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 0.053% fail on Towbar
  • 0.53% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.53% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.32% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.32% fail on Attachment