MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » Nissan » Largo » 1996
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 1996
42.6% 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 Headlamp aim not tested
  • 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
    • 1.5% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 1.5% fail on Condition
    • 0.74% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.74% fail on Condition
  • 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)
    • 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
  • 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 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
  • 0.74% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.74% fail on Registration plate