Do you want the Road Tax system to change? Do you have thoughts on the potential changes to the Road Tax system? | No thanks
Nissan Largo MOT Results
Registered in 199642.6% pass rate
from 136 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 1996 vans and highlighted areas where the Nissan Largo is unusually good or bad.
-
37% fail on
Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
-
20% fail on
Rear fog lamp
(2 times worse than other 1996 vans)
- 18% fail on Fog lamp (2 times worse than other 1996 vans)
- 2.9% fail on Tell tale (3 times worse than other 1996 vans)
-
9.6% fail on
Position lamps
- 7.4% fail on Front lamps
- 2.2% fail on Rear lamps
- 8.8% fail on Registration plate lamp
-
7.4% fail on
Headlamps
- 7.4% fail on Headlamp
- 0.74% fail on Switch
- 7.4% fail on Headlamp aim
- 5.9% fail on Battery
- 4.4% fail on Stop lamp
- 1.5% fail on Horn
- 0.74% fail on Trailer electrical socket
- 0.74% fail on Rear reflectors
-
0.74% fail on
Direction indicators
-
0.74% fail on
Flashing type
- 0.74% fail on Individual lamps
- 0.74% fail on Side repeaters
-
0.74% fail on
Flashing type
- 0.74% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
-
20% fail on
Rear fog lamp
(2 times worse than other 1996 vans)
-
29% fail on
Suspension
-
13% fail on
Prescribed areas
- 13% fail on Component mounting
- 1.5% fail on Subframe mounting
-
11% fail on
Anti-roll bars
(150% worse than other 1996 vans)
- 9.6% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (2 times worse than other 1996 vans)
- 1.5% fail on Linkage condition
- 0.74% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
-
7.4% fail on
Suspension arms
(150% worse than other 1996 vans)
- 7.4% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (160% worse than other 1996 vans)
-
2.9% fail on
Drive shafts
-
2.9% fail on
Front drive shafts
- 2.9% fail on Constant velocity joints
-
2.9% fail on
Front drive shafts
-
1.5% fail on
Shock absorbers
- 1.5% fail on Condition
-
0.74% fail on
Macpherson strut
- 0.74% fail on Condition
-
13% fail on
Prescribed areas
-
15% fail on
Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
- 7.4% fail on Exhaust system
- 6.6% fail on Emissions (2 times worse than other 1996 vans)
-
2.2% fail on
Fuel system
- 2.2% fail on System
- 1.5% fail on Emissions not tested
-
11% fail on
Brakes
-
5.9% fail on
Hydraulic systems
-
5.1% fail on
Components
- 5.1% fail on Pipes
- 1.5% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp (5 times worse than other 1996 vans)
-
5.1% fail on
Components
-
3.7% fail on
Hub components
- 2.2% fail on Brake pads
- 1.5% fail on Brake calipers (9 times worse than other 1996 vans)
-
3.7% fail on
Brake performance
(69% better than other 1996 vans)
- 1.5% fail on Brake imbalance
- 1.5% fail on Front wheels
- 1.5% fail on Rear wheels
- 0.74% fail on Parking brake performance
-
5.9% fail on
Hydraulic systems
-
11% fail on
Driver's view of the road
- 8.8% fail on Wipers
- 2.9% fail on Washers
-
8.8% fail on
Body, Structure and General Items
- 6.6% fail on Body condition
-
2.2% fail on
Vehicle structure
- 2.2% fail on Chassis
- 0.74% fail on Body security
-
8.1% fail on
Steering
-
8.1% fail on
Steering system
- 5.1% fail on Steering rack (170% worse than other 1996 vans)
- 3.7% fail on Track rod end
-
0.74% fail on
Free play
- 0.74% fail on Steering rack
-
0.74% fail on
Power steering
- 0.74% fail on Other components
-
8.1% fail on
Steering system
-
8.1% fail on
Tyres
- 5.1% fail on Condition
- 3.7% fail on Tread depth
-
2.9% fail on
Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
-
2.9% fail on
Seat belts
- 2.2% fail on Prescribed areas
- 0.74% fail on Requirements
-
2.9% fail on
Seat belts
-
0.74% fail on
Registration plates and VIN
- 0.74% fail on Registration plate