MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » Toyota » Dyna » 2010

Toyota Dyna MOT Results

Registered in 2010
56.7% pass rate
from 180 tests in 2020
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 Toyota Dyna is unusually good or bad.

  • 27% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 10% fail on Stop lamp
    • 8.9% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 8.9% fail on Rear fog lamp (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 8.9% fail on Rear fog lamp (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 6.7% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 5.0% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 4.4% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.56% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 3.3% fail on Reversing lamps (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 3.3% fail on Reversing lamps (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 2.8% fail on Headlamps
      • 2.8% fail on Headlamp
    • 2.2% fail on Position lamps
      • 1.7% fail on Position lamp
      • 0.56% fail on All position lamps
    • 1.1% fail on Direction indicators
      • 1.1% fail on Flashing type
        • 1.1% fail on Individual direction indicators
    • 0.56% fail on Mandatory tell-tales
      • 0.56% fail on Rear fog lamp tell-tale
    • 0.56% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.56% fail on Battery(ies)
  • 18% fail on Suspension
    • 13% fail on Anti-roll bars (140% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 9.4% fail on Pins and bushes (8 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 5.6% fail on Linkage pins and bushes (8 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 5.6% fail on Springs
      • 5.6% fail on Leaf springs (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 5.0% fail on Leaf spring (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.56% fail on Fixings and fixing bolts
    • 1.1% fail on Suspension arms
      • 1.1% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.56% fail on Wheel bearings
  • 16% fail on Brakes
    • 12% fail on Brake performance (88% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 6.7% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp) (7 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 6.7% fail on Rbt (sp) (8 times worse than other 2010 vans)
          • 5.0% fail on Service brake imbalance (12 times worse than other 2010 vans)
          • 3.3% fail on Service brake performance (6 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 6.1% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 6.1% fail on Rbt (sp)
      • 5.6% fail on Service brake performance (190% worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 5.6% fail on Rbt (200% worse than other 2010 vans)
          • 3.9% fail on Service brake performance
          • 2.8% fail on Service brake imbalance (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.1% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 1.1% fail on Rbt
          • 0.56% fail on Parking brake performance
          • 0.56% fail on Parking brake efficiency (Trikes, quads and pre-68 vehicles)
      • 0.56% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 2.8% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 1.7% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 1.1% fail on Brake pads
        • 0.56% fail on Brake linings
      • 1.7% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 1.1% fail on Cable
        • 0.56% fail on Clevis joint
    • 2.8% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 2.8% fail on Anti-lock braking system (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 2.2% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 1.1% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders) (6 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.1% fail on Hydraulic brake cylinder (36 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.56% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.56% fail on Pedal
    • 0.56% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.56% fail on Valves
    • 0.56% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.56% fail on Load sensing valves
  • 13% fail on Visibility (67% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 8.9% fail on Washers (150% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 4.4% fail on Wipers
    • 2.2% fail on View to rear
      • 2.2% fail on Mirrors
    • 1.1% fail on Condition of glass
      • 1.1% fail on Windscreen
  • 6.7% fail on Tyres
    • 3.9% fail on Condition
    • 3.9% fail on Tread depth
  • 6.1% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 5.6% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 3.3% fail on Compression ignition
        • 2.2% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.56% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
        • 0.56% fail on Emissions not tested
      • 2.2% fail on Spark ignition
        • 2.2% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
    • 1.1% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 1.1% fail on Other leaks (10 times worse than other 2010 vans)
  • 5.0% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 2.2% fail on Body (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.1% fail on Mounting fixings (55 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.56% fail on Panel
      • 0.56% fail on Other body component
    • 1.1% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 1.1% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 0.56% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.56% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.56% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
    • 0.56% fail on Towbar
      • 0.56% fail on Other towbar components
  • 3.3% fail on Identification of the vehicle (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.3% fail on Registration plates (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
  • 0.56% fail on Steering
    • 0.56% fail on Steering coupling
      • 0.56% fail on Universal joint
  • 0.56% fail on Speedometer and speed limiter
    • 0.56% fail on Speedometer
  • 0.56% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 0.56% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.56% fail on Condition
  • 0.56% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.56% fail on Attachment