Mercedes-Benz Vito MOT Results
Registered in 200044.9% pass rate
from 559 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 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
-
17% fail on
Front drive shafts
(3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
-
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
-
19% fail on
Prescribed areas
(77% worse than other 2000 vans)
-
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)
-
7.2% fail on
Flashing type
(95% 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
-
11% fail on
Headlamps
(170% worse than other 2000 vans)
-
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
-
14% fail on
Components
(43% worse than other 2000 vans)
-
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
-
0.54% fail on
Pedal
-
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
-
0.36% fail on
Components
(5 times worse than other 2000 vans)
- 0.18% fail on Electronic stability system
- 0.18% fail on Locking devices
- 0.18% fail on Restricted movement
-
22% fail on
Brake performance
(74% worse than other 2000 vans)
-
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
-
9.7% fail on
Seat belts
(86% worse than other 2000 vans)
-
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
-
6.1% fail on
Steering system
-
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