MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » Nissan » Navara » 2010

Nissan Navara MOT Results

Registered in 2010
57.1% pass rate
from 2,508 tests in 2021
Pass rate by mileage
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 2010 vans and highlighted areas where the Nissan Navara is unusually good or bad.

  • 17% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (13% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.9% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 3.6% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.32% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 3.9% fail on Direction indicators (37% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 3.9% fail on Flashing type (37% worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 3.1% fail on Side repeaters (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.76% fail on Individual direction indicators (62% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.080% fail on All direction indicators
    • 3.4% fail on Registration plate lamp(s) (35% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 2.8% fail on Headlamps
      • 2.6% fail on Headlamp
      • 0.24% fail on Headlamp levelling device
      • 0.040% fail on Matched pair
      • 0.040% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
    • 2.4% fail on Stop lamp (58% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.8% fail on Electrical equipment (95% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.2% fail on Horn (92% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.32% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.28% fail on Trailer electrical socket (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.16% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 1.6% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 1.6% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 1.6% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 0.64% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.64% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.40% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.36% fail on Position lamp
      • 0.040% fail on All position lamps
    • 0.080% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.080% fail on Switch
    • 0.080% fail on Rear reflectors
  • 14% fail on Suspension (16% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 5.7% fail on Suspension arms
      • 5.5% fail on Ball joint (86% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.20% fail on Ball joint dust cover (79% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.080% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
    • 3.8% fail on Springs
      • 1.9% fail on Leaf springs
        • 1.8% fail on Leaf spring
        • 0.080% fail on Fixings and fixing bolts
        • 0.080% fail on Shackle pins and bushes
      • 1.6% fail on Coil springs (45% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 1.6% fail on Coil spring (45% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.32% fail on Spring mounting prescribed areas (160% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.1% fail on Anti-roll bars (50% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.8% fail on Linkage ball joints
      • 0.44% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.32% fail on Linkage
      • 0.20% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover (84% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.16% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.12% fail on Ball joint dust cover (79% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.080% fail on Anti-roll bar
      • 0.080% fail on Linkage pins and bushes (86% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.040% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.040% fail on Linkage attachment bracket and mounting
    • 2.3% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 1.2% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 0.72% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.64% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.040% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.040% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 0.56% fail on Shock absorbers
  • 11% fail on Body, chassis, structure (40% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 6.3% fail on Transmission (58% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 4.1% fail on Drive shafts
        • 4.1% fail on Joints
      • 2.7% fail on Prop shafts (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 1.9% fail on Joints (7 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.64% fail on Prop shaft (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.20% fail on Flexible couplings (5 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.4% fail on Exhaust system (130% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.8% fail on Chassis (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.8% fail on Chassis condition (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.32% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.24% fail on Tank
      • 0.040% fail on Pipe
      • 0.040% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
    • 0.20% fail on Integral vehicle structure (74% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.20% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition (73% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.16% fail on Spare wheel
      • 0.12% fail on Spare wheel condition (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.040% fail on Carrier
    • 0.16% fail on Body
      • 0.080% fail on Panel
      • 0.080% fail on Other body component
    • 0.16% fail on Doors
      • 0.12% fail on Driver's door
        • 0.080% fail on Door condition
        • 0.040% fail on Hinge
      • 0.040% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.040% fail on Door condition
    • 0.12% fail on Cabs
      • 0.080% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.040% fail on Mounting fixings
    • 0.080% fail on Seats
      • 0.080% fail on Driver's seat
    • 0.040% fail on Boot lid
      • 0.040% fail on Boot lid condition
  • 11% fail on Brakes (27% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.8% fail on Brake performance (51% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 2.4% fail on Service brake performance
        • 2.3% fail on Rbt
          • 1.6% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.92% fail on Service brake imbalance
        • 0.080% fail on Decelerometer (9 times worse than other 2010 vans)
          • 0.080% fail on Service brake performance (9 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.3% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 1.3% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 1.2% fail on Service brake imbalance (150% worse than other 2010 vans)
          • 0.40% fail on Service brake performance
      • 1.1% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (79% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.96% fail on Rbt (sp) (81% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.12% fail on Decelerometer (sp)
      • 0.36% fail on Parking brake performance (81% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.36% fail on Rbt (81% better than other 2010 vans)
          • 0.28% fail on Parking brake performance (84% better than other 2010 vans)
          • 0.080% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance)
      • 0.32% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 3.2% fail on Mechanical brake components (29% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 2.5% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 2.5% fail on Brake pads
        • 0.080% fail on Brake linings
      • 0.96% fail on Brake discs and drums (42% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.92% fail on Brake discs (44% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.080% fail on Brake drums
      • 0.040% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.040% fail on Cable
    • 2.8% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 2.0% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC (45% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.2% fail on Electronic stability control (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.1% fail on Anti-lock braking system
    • 0.44% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.36% fail on Pedal
      • 0.080% fail on Hand lever
    • 0.44% fail on Load sensing valves (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.16% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.16% fail on Hydraulic brake cylinder (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.12% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.080% fail on Parking brake control (86% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.080% fail on Lever (86% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.040% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 0.040% fail on Leaks
  • 9.6% fail on Visibility
    • 6.5% fail on Washers (55% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.4% fail on Wipers
    • 0.24% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.24% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.16% fail on View to rear (78% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.16% fail on Mirrors (77% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.040% fail on Bonnet
  • 9.6% fail on Steering (80% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 8.6% fail on Steering linkage components (96% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 8.3% fail on Track rod end (100% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.24% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.080% fail on Locking devices
      • 0.040% fail on Other components
        • 0.040% fail on Steering linkage
    • 0.32% fail on Power steering
      • 0.28% fail on Operation
      • 0.040% fail on Other components
    • 0.32% fail on Steering column (12 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.20% fail on Steering gear
      • 0.20% fail on Steering rack
    • 0.20% fail on Steering coupling (15 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.16% fail on Flexible coupling (45 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.040% fail on Universal joint
    • 0.12% fail on Steering shaft (41 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.12% fail on Steering play
      • 0.12% fail on Steering rack
  • 6.6% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 6.3% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 5.2% fail on Compression ignition
        • 3.8% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (69% worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.92% fail on On or after 01/07/2008 (51% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.60% fail on Emissions not tested
        • 0.040% fail on Emission control equipment
          • 0.040% fail on Catalytic converter
      • 1.2% fail on Spark ignition
        • 1.1% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.080% fail on Catalyst emissions
        • 0.040% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 0.40% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.36% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.040% fail on Transmission oil leaks
  • 4.8% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (99% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.9% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.96% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.84% fail on Condition
      • 0.080% fail on Prescribed areas (90% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.040% fail on Requirements
    • 0.040% fail on Airbags
      • 0.040% fail on Drivers airbag
  • 3.7% fail on Tyres (40% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.1% fail on Tread depth
    • 0.80% fail on Condition (70% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.12% fail on Size/type
  • 0.76% fail on Road Wheels (160% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.72% fail on Attachment (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.040% fail on Condition
  • 0.68% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.68% fail on Registration plates