Do you have a minute to answer an electric vehicle survey? Start the survey | No thanks

Piaggio Porter MOT Results

Registered in 2005
57.1% pass rate
from 84 tests in 2020
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 2005 vans and highlighted areas where the Piaggio Porter is unusually good or bad.

  • 25% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 12% fail on Headlamp aim (160% worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 12% fail on Headlamp aim (180% worse than other 2005 vans)
    • 9.5% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (2 times worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 9.5% fail on Rear fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2005 vans)
        • 9.5% fail on Rear fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2005 vans)
    • 7.1% fail on Direction indicators
      • 7.1% fail on Flashing type
        • 6.0% fail on Individual direction indicators
        • 1.2% fail on All direction indicators
    • 3.6% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.6% fail on Headlamp
    • 3.6% fail on Stop lamp
    • 2.4% fail on Position lamps
      • 2.4% fail on Position lamp
    • 2.4% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 2.4% fail on Horn
      • 1.2% fail on Battery(ies)
    • 1.2% fail on Mandatory tell-tales
      • 1.2% fail on Rear fog lamp tell-tale
  • 21% fail on Brakes
    • 18% fail on Brake performance
      • 15% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp) (5 times worse than other 2005 vans)
        • 15% fail on Rbt (sp) (5 times worse than other 2005 vans)
          • 11% fail on Service brake imbalance (5 times worse than other 2005 vans)
          • 9.5% fail on Service brake performance (6 times worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 7.1% fail on Service brake performance
        • 7.1% fail on Rbt
          • 6.0% fail on Service brake performance
          • 1.2% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 2.4% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 2.4% fail on Rbt (sp)
    • 4.8% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 2.4% fail on Load sensing valves
    • 1.2% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 1.2% fail on Pedal
    • 1.2% fail on Parking brake control
      • 1.2% fail on Lever
  • 13% fail on Visibility
    • 8.3% fail on Wipers
    • 7.1% fail on Washers
    • 1.2% fail on View to rear
      • 1.2% fail on Mirrors
  • 12% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 4.8% fail on Exhaust system
    • 3.6% fail on Bumpers (6 times worse than other 2005 vans)
    • 2.4% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 2.4% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 2.4% fail on Chassis
      • 2.4% fail on Chassis condition
    • 1.2% fail on Body
      • 1.2% fail on Other body component
    • 1.2% fail on Boot lid
      • 1.2% fail on Other boot lid component
    • 1.2% fail on Cabs
      • 1.2% fail on Cab condition
  • 9.5% fail on Suspension (55% better than other 2005 vans)
    • 4.8% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 2.4% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 1.2% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 1.2% fail on Springs
      • 1.2% fail on Leaf springs
        • 1.2% fail on Leaf spring
  • 8.3% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 8.3% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 8.3% fail on Spark ignition (9 times worse than other 2005 vans)
        • 6.0% fail on Catalyst emissions (32 times worse than other 2005 vans)
        • 3.6% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (5 times worse than other 2005 vans)
        • 2.4% fail on Emissions not tested (29 times worse than other 2005 vans)
      • 1.2% fail on Compression ignition
        • 1.2% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
  • 6.0% fail on Tyres
    • 6.0% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.2% fail on Condition
  • 2.4% fail on Steering
    • 1.2% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 1.2% fail on Track rod end
    • 1.2% fail on Steering play
      • 1.2% fail on Steering rack
  • 2.4% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 2.4% fail on Seat belts
      • 1.2% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 1.2% fail on Condition