MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » Toyota » Dyna » 2010

Toyota Dyna MOT Results

Registered in 2010
56.0% pass rate
from 168 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 2010 vans and highlighted areas where the Toyota Dyna is unusually good or bad.

  • 29% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 10% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 10% fail on Rear fog lamp (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 10% fail on Fog lamp (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.60% fail on Tell tale
    • 9.5% fail on Stop lamp
    • 8.3% fail on Position lamps
      • 6.0% fail on Rear lamps (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 3.0% fail on Front lamps
    • 4.8% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 4.2% fail on Direction indicators
      • 4.2% fail on Flashing type
        • 3.0% fail on Individual lamps
        • 1.2% fail on All direction indicators
    • 0.60% fail on Battery
    • 0.60% fail on Trailer electrical socket
    • 0.60% fail on Headlamps
      • 0.60% fail on Headlamp
  • 18% fail on Suspension
    • 11% fail on Anti-roll bars (150% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 7.7% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (5 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 3.0% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.60% fail on Attachment
    • 8.9% fail on Leaf springs (10 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 7.1% fail on Condition (18 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.2% fail on Pins and bushes (6 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 1.2% fail on Anchor (26 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.60% fail on Securing bolts
    • 4.2% fail on Shock absorbers (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 4.2% fail on Condition (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.60% fail on Suspension arms
      • 0.60% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.60% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.60% fail on Front
  • 15% fail on Brakes
    • 7.7% fail on Brake performance
      • 4.2% fail on Front wheels (3 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 3.6% fail on Rear wheels
      • 3.0% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 1.8% fail on Service brake performance (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.60% fail on Brake imbalance
    • 4.8% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 4.2% fail on Components
        • 3.6% fail on Pipes
        • 0.60% fail on Valves
      • 0.60% fail on Leaks
    • 4.8% fail on Hub components
      • 4.2% fail on Brake pads
      • 0.60% fail on Brake drums
      • 0.60% fail on Brake discs
    • 1.8% fail on ABS
    • 0.60% fail on Electronic stability system
    • 0.60% fail on Parking brake
      • 0.60% fail on Condition
    • 0.60% fail on Service brake control components
      • 0.60% fail on Pedal
        • 0.60% fail on Anti-slip
  • 8.9% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 4.2% fail on Washers
    • 3.6% fail on Wipers
    • 1.8% fail on Mirrors
  • 7.7% fail on Tyres
    • 6.5% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.2% fail on Condition
  • 4.8% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions (180% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.6% fail on Fuel system (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.8% fail on Tank (15 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.2% fail on Cap (6 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.60% fail on System
    • 1.8% fail on Exhaust system
    • 0.60% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 2.4% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 2.4% fail on Registration plate
  • 1.8% fail on Road Wheels (7 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.8% fail on Attachment (11 times worse than other 2010 vans)
  • 1.2% fail on Steering
    • 0.60% fail on Steering control
      • 0.60% fail on Steering coupling
        • 0.60% fail on Universal joint
    • 0.60% fail on Steering system
      • 0.60% fail on Steering arm
  • 0.60% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 0.60% fail on Body security