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

Mercedes-Benz Vito MOT Results

Registered in 2000
44.9% pass rate
from 559 tests in 2017
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 Mercedes-Benz Vito is unusually good or bad.

  • 36% fail on Suspension (52% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 19% fail on Prescribed areas (77% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 14% fail on Component mounting (100% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 9.7% fail on Subframe mounting (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.6% fail on Spring mounting (62% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 17% fail on Drive shafts (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 17% fail on Front drive shafts (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 16% fail on Constant velocity joints (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 0.54% fail on Couplings (13 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 0.18% fail on Drive shafts
      • 0.18% fail on Any drive shaft which is part of the suspension
        • 0.18% fail on Drive shafts
    • 10% fail on Anti-roll bars (180% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 8.1% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.8% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.36% fail on Linkage condition
      • 0.18% fail on Attachment
    • 3.2% fail on Suspension arms
      • 3.0% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.18% fail on Attachment
    • 1.8% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 1.8% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 1.8% fail on Condition
    • 1.4% fail on Coil springs
      • 1.4% fail on Condition
    • 0.72% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.72% fail on Front
    • 0.54% fail on Sub-frames
      • 0.36% fail on Attachment (7 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.18% fail on Condition
    • 0.36% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.36% fail on Condition
    • 0.18% fail on Trailing arms
      • 0.18% fail on Attachment
    • 0.18% fail on Tie bars/rods
      • 0.18% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
  • 34% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (20% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 11% fail on Headlamps (170% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 10% fail on Headlamp (170% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.36% fail on Headlamp defects which don't require an aim check on retest
        • 0.36% fail on Main beam 'tell-tale'
      • 0.18% fail on Matched pair
    • 8.4% fail on Position lamps
      • 6.1% fail on Front lamps
      • 2.5% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.18% fail on All position lamps
    • 7.3% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 7.2% fail on Direction indicators (95% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 7.2% fail on Flashing type (95% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 4.1% fail on Individual lamps
        • 2.3% fail on Side repeaters (160% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 0.72% fail on All direction indicators
        • 0.54% fail on Tell tales (16 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 6.8% fail on Stop lamp
    • 6.4% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 3.0% fail on Horn
    • 2.3% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 2.1% fail on Fog lamp
      • 0.18% fail on Tell tale
      • 0.18% fail on Switch
    • 1.1% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.89% fail on Lamp
      • 0.54% fail on Switch
    • 0.54% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.54% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 0.36% fail on Trailer electrical socket
  • 31% fail on Brakes (47% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 22% fail on Brake performance (74% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 16% fail on Parking brake performance (200% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 7.7% fail on Rear wheels
      • 4.1% fail on Front wheels
      • 3.0% fail on Service brake performance
      • 1.4% fail on Brake performance not tested (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.89% fail on Brake imbalance
    • 15% fail on Hydraulic systems (45% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 14% fail on Components (43% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 10% fail on Pipes (86% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 2.3% fail on Hoses
        • 2.3% fail on Valves
        • 0.18% fail on Reservoirs
      • 1.1% fail on Leaks
      • 0.54% fail on Operation
    • 3.2% fail on Hub components
      • 2.1% fail on Brake pads
      • 1.4% fail on Brake discs
    • 2.7% fail on Parking brake (120% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 2.7% fail on Condition (120% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.89% fail on ABS (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.54% fail on Service brake control components
      • 0.54% fail on Pedal
        • 0.36% fail on Anti-slip
        • 0.18% fail on Condition
    • 0.36% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 0.36% fail on Components (5 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 0.18% fail on Pipes
        • 0.18% fail on Servos
    • 0.18% fail on Electronic stability system
    • 0.18% fail on Locking devices
    • 0.18% fail on Restricted movement
  • 16% fail on Body, Structure and General Items (87% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 6.8% fail on Body condition (52% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 5.7% fail on Vehicle structure (120% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 5.7% fail on Chassis (120% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 3.8% fail on Doors (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.8% fail on Drivers (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.4% fail on Passengers other (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.1% fail on Passengers front
    • 0.36% fail on Speedometer (5 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.18% fail on Engine mountings
    • 0.18% fail on Seats
      • 0.18% fail on Drivers
  • 13% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 7.2% fail on Wipers
    • 5.5% fail on Washers
    • 1.8% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.72% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.54% fail on Bonnet
  • 11% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 8.4% fail on Exhaust system (48% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.8% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.89% fail on System
      • 0.36% fail on Pipe
      • 0.36% fail on Cap
      • 0.18% fail on Tank
    • 1.4% fail on Emissions
    • 1.1% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 10% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems (74% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 9.7% fail on Seat belts (86% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 8.6% fail on Prescribed areas (110% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.72% fail on Condition
      • 0.36% fail on Attachment
      • 0.18% fail on Requirements
    • 0.36% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 0.36% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
  • 9.3% fail on Tyres
    • 4.8% fail on Tread depth
    • 4.1% fail on Condition
    • 0.89% fail on Size/type
  • 6.3% fail on Steering
    • 6.1% fail on Steering system
      • 4.3% fail on Track rod end
      • 1.1% fail on Free play (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 1.1% fail on Steering rack (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.54% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.36% fail on Steering rack (80% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.18% fail on Drag link end
    • 0.18% fail on Steering control
      • 0.18% fail on Steering column
    • 0.18% fail on Power steering
      • 0.18% fail on Operation
    • 0.18% fail on Locking devices
  • 2.0% fail on Towbars (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 2.0% fail on Vehicle structure (5 times worse than other 2000 vans)
  • 1.4% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 1.3% fail on Registration plate
    • 0.18% fail on Vehicle Identification Number
  • 0.72% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.54% fail on Attachment
    • 0.18% fail on Condition