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

Mitsubishi L200 MOT Results

Registered in 1996
57.5% pass rate
from 73 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 1996 vans and highlighted areas where the Mitsubishi L200 is unusually good or bad.

  • 22% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 8.2% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 5.5% fail on Stop lamp
    • 5.5% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 4.1% fail on Position lamps
      • 4.1% fail on Rear lamps
    • 4.1% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 4.1% fail on Fog lamp
    • 2.7% fail on Rear reflectors (10 times worse than other 1996 vans)
    • 2.7% fail on Horn
    • 1.4% fail on Headlamps
      • 1.4% fail on Headlamp
    • 1.4% fail on Direction indicators
      • 1.4% fail on Flashing type
        • 1.4% fail on All direction indicators
  • 21% fail on Suspension
    • 11% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 5.5% fail on Spring mounting
      • 4.1% fail on Component mounting
      • 1.4% fail on Subframe mounting
    • 5.5% fail on Leaf springs (9 times worse than other 1996 vans)
      • 5.5% fail on Pins and bushes (23 times worse than other 1996 vans)
        • 5.5% fail on Shackle (28 times worse than other 1996 vans)
    • 4.1% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.4% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 1.4% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 1.4% fail on Linkage condition
    • 4.1% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 4.1% fail on Condition
    • 2.7% fail on Drive shafts
      • 2.7% fail on Front drive shafts
        • 2.7% fail on Constant velocity joints
    • 1.4% fail on Suspension arms
      • 1.4% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 1.4% fail on Front suspension joints
  • 16% fail on Brakes
    • 8.2% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 6.8% fail on Components
        • 5.5% fail on Pipes
        • 1.4% fail on Valves
      • 2.7% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp (11 times worse than other 1996 vans)
    • 5.5% fail on Brake performance
      • 4.1% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 2.7% fail on Front wheels
      • 1.4% fail on Rear wheels
      • 1.4% fail on Service brake performance
    • 1.4% fail on Parking brake
      • 1.4% fail on Condition
    • 1.4% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 1.4% fail on Components
        • 1.4% fail on Pump/compressors
    • 1.4% fail on Restricted movement
    • 1.4% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 1.4% fail on Master cylinder/servo mounting
  • 12% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 8.2% fail on Vehicle structure (2 times worse than other 1996 vans)
      • 8.2% fail on Chassis (2 times worse than other 1996 vans)
    • 6.8% fail on Body condition
  • 9.6% fail on Steering
    • 8.2% fail on Steering system
      • 4.1% fail on Track rod end
      • 2.7% fail on Ball joint (5 times worse than other 1996 vans)
      • 1.4% fail on Free play
        • 1.4% fail on Steering box
      • 1.4% fail on Steering arm
    • 1.4% fail on Power steering
      • 1.4% fail on Pump
    • 1.4% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 9.6% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 6.8% fail on Wipers
    • 4.1% fail on Washers
    • 1.4% fail on Mirrors
  • 8.2% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 8.2% fail on Exhaust system
    • 1.4% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 4.1% fail on Tyres
    • 2.7% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.4% fail on Condition
  • 2.7% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 2.7% fail on Registration plate
  • 1.4% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 1.4% fail on Seat belts
      • 1.4% fail on Prescribed areas