MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » Toyota » Hi-Ace » 2010

Toyota Hi-Ace MOT Results

Registered in 2010
71.3% pass rate
from 894 tests in 2020
(34% better than other 2010 vans)
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 Toyota Hi-Ace is unusually good or bad.

  • 12% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (42% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 4.6% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 3.0% fail on Stop lamp (50% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 2.1% fail on Headlamp aim (46% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 2.0% fail on Headlamp aim (45% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.11% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 1.8% fail on Position lamps (50% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.7% fail on Position lamp (51% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.11% fail on All position lamps
    • 1.1% fail on Direction indicators (58% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.1% fail on Flashing type (58% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.67% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.45% fail on Individual direction indicators (75% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.78% fail on Headlamps (77% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.45% fail on Headlamp (86% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.22% fail on Headlamp levelling device
      • 0.11% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
    • 0.45% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (77% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.45% fail on Rear fog lamp (77% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.45% fail on Rear fog lamp (76% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.45% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.45% fail on Battery(ies)
    • 0.11% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.11% fail on Mandatory tell-tales
      • 0.11% fail on Main beam tell-tale
  • 7.4% fail on Suspension (48% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 6.6% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 4.4% fail on Linkage pins and bushes (6 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.3% fail on Linkage (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.56% fail on Linkage ball joints (73% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.22% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.11% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.11% fail on Linkage attachment bracket and mounting
    • 0.56% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.45% fail on Suspension arms (90% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.45% fail on Ball joint (80% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.11% fail on Shock absorbers
  • 6.6% fail on Brakes (51% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 2.5% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 1.6% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 1.6% fail on Anti-lock braking system (110% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.0% fail on Mechanical brake components (79% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.0% fail on Brake linings and pads (71% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 1.0% fail on Brake pads (71% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.78% fail on Brake performance (88% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.45% fail on Service brake performance (77% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.45% fail on Rbt (76% better than other 2010 vans)
          • 0.45% fail on Service brake performance (69% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.22% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 0.22% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.22% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 0.11% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 0.11% fail on Rbt
          • 0.11% fail on Parking brake performance
    • 0.56% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.56% fail on Lever
    • 0.34% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.34% fail on Pedal
    • 0.22% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.11% fail on Reservoirs
      • 0.11% fail on Brake fluid
    • 0.11% fail on Load sensing valves
  • 5.6% fail on Visibility (30% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 3.9% fail on Wipers
    • 1.7% fail on Washers (54% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.22% fail on View to rear
      • 0.22% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.11% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.11% fail on Windscreen
  • 5.6% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 5.5% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 5.0% fail on Compression ignition
        • 3.9% fail on On or after 01/07/2008 (80% worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.45% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Turbo (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.45% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp (78% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.11% fail on Emission control equipment
          • 0.11% fail on Catalytic converter
        • 0.11% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Non turbo
      • 0.45% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.34% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 0.11% fail on Catalyst emissions
    • 0.11% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.11% fail on Other leaks
  • 3.4% fail on Tyres (44% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 2.5% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.0% fail on Condition (58% better than other 2010 vans)
  • 0.78% fail on Body, chassis, structure (88% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.34% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.22% fail on System
      • 0.11% fail on Pipe
    • 0.22% fail on Exhaust system (81% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.11% fail on Transmission
      • 0.11% fail on Drive shafts
        • 0.11% fail on Joints
    • 0.11% fail on Boot lid
      • 0.11% fail on Boot lid condition
  • 0.56% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (69% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.45% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.45% fail on Condition
    • 0.11% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
  • 0.45% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 0.45% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.22% fail on Steering (95% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.11% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 0.11% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.11% fail on Steering play
      • 0.11% fail on Steering rack