Mazda Bongo MOT Results
Registered in 200261.1% pass rate
from 624 tests in 2017
(24% better than other 2002 vans)
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 2002 vans and highlighted areas where the Mazda Bongo is unusually good or bad.
-
27% fail on
Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
-
12% fail on
Rear fog lamp
(200% worse than other 2002 vans)
- 12% fail on Fog lamp (190% worse than other 2002 vans)
- 1.9% fail on Tell tale (7 times worse than other 2002 vans)
- 1.9% fail on Switch (21 times worse than other 2002 vans)
- 6.6% fail on Registration plate lamp (38% better than other 2002 vans)
-
5.1% fail on
Position lamps
(41% better than other 2002 vans)
- 3.7% fail on Front lamps
- 1.9% fail on Rear lamps
- 0.16% fail on All position lamps
- 4.3% fail on Headlamp aim
- 2.6% fail on Stop lamp (65% better than other 2002 vans)
- 2.1% fail on Battery
-
1.8% fail on
Headlamps
(57% better than other 2002 vans)
- 1.8% fail on Headlamp (56% better than other 2002 vans)
-
1.1% fail on
Direction indicators
(73% better than other 2002 vans)
-
1.1% fail on
Flashing type
(73% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.80% fail on Individual lamps (70% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.32% fail on All direction indicators
- 0.16% fail on Tell tales
-
1.1% fail on
Flashing type
(73% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.32% fail on Horn (87% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.16% fail on Trailer electrical socket
-
12% fail on
Rear fog lamp
(200% worse than other 2002 vans)
-
10% fail on
Suspension
(59% better than other 2002 vans)
-
4.0% fail on
Anti-roll bars
- 3.4% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
- 0.96% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
-
2.7% fail on
Suspension arms
(47% better than other 2002 vans)
- 2.7% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (45% better than other 2002 vans)
-
1.9% fail on
Prescribed areas
(77% better than other 2002 vans)
- 1.4% fail on Component mounting (71% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.48% fail on Subframe mounting
- 1.8% fail on Front suspension joints
-
0.96% fail on
Shock absorbers
- 0.96% fail on Condition
-
0.32% fail on
Drive shafts
(93% better than other 2002 vans)
-
0.32% fail on
Front drive shafts
(93% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.32% fail on Constant velocity joints (93% better than other 2002 vans)
-
0.32% fail on
Front drive shafts
(93% better than other 2002 vans)
-
0.16% fail on
Coil springs
- 0.16% fail on Condition
-
0.16% fail on
Tie bars/rods
- 0.16% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
-
4.0% fail on
Anti-roll bars
-
7.5% fail on
Driver's view of the road
(39% better than other 2002 vans)
- 5.3% fail on Wipers
- 1.8% fail on Windscreen
- 1.8% fail on Washers (61% better than other 2002 vans)
-
5.1% fail on
Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
- 4.2% fail on Emissions (150% worse than other 2002 vans)
- 0.96% fail on Exhaust system (78% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.16% fail on Emissions not tested
-
4.8% fail on
Brakes
(78% better than other 2002 vans)
-
2.6% fail on
Hub components
- 2.1% fail on Brake pads
- 0.48% fail on Brake discs
-
1.1% fail on
Brake performance
(91% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.64% fail on Front wheels (85% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.32% fail on Parking brake performance (95% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.16% fail on Brake imbalance
- 0.16% fail on Rear wheels
- 0.16% fail on Service brake performance
- 0.96% fail on ABS
-
0.32% fail on
Hydraulic systems
(97% better than other 2002 vans)
-
0.32% fail on
Components
(97% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.16% fail on Cylinders
- 0.16% fail on Pipes
- 0.16% fail on Leaks
-
0.32% fail on
Components
(97% better than other 2002 vans)
-
0.16% fail on
Parking brake
- 0.16% fail on Condition
- 0.16% fail on Restricted movement
-
2.6% fail on
Hub components
-
4.6% fail on
Tyres
(43% better than other 2002 vans)
- 2.4% fail on Condition
- 2.2% fail on Tread depth (55% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.32% fail on Size/type
- 0.16% fail on Valve stem
-
2.2% fail on
Steering
(70% better than other 2002 vans)
-
2.2% fail on
Steering system
(65% better than other 2002 vans)
- 1.9% fail on Track rod end (57% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.32% fail on Steering rack
- 0.16% fail on Ball joint
-
2.2% fail on
Steering system
(65% better than other 2002 vans)
-
1.6% fail on
Body, Structure and General Items
(79% better than other 2002 vans)
-
0.80% fail on
Doors
- 0.48% fail on Passengers front
- 0.32% fail on Drivers
- 0.64% fail on Body condition (84% better than other 2002 vans)
-
0.32% fail on
Seats
- 0.32% fail on Drivers
-
0.80% fail on
Doors
-
1.4% fail on
Registration plates and VIN
- 1.4% fail on Registration plate
-
1.3% fail on
Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
(76% better than other 2002 vans)
-
0.96% fail on
Seat belts
(77% better than other 2002 vans)
- 0.48% fail on Requirements
- 0.16% fail on Condition
- 0.16% fail on Attachment
- 0.16% fail on Prescribed areas
-
0.32% fail on
Supplementary restraint systems
- 0.32% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
-
0.96% fail on
Seat belts
(77% better than other 2002 vans)
-
0.16% fail on
Towbars
- 0.16% fail on Vehicle structure