MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » Toyota » Hi-Lux » 2000

Toyota Hi-Lux MOT Results

Registered in 2000
54.5% pass rate
from 859 tests in 2017
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 2000 vans and highlighted areas where the Toyota Hi-Lux is unusually good or bad.

  • 29% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 13% fail on Rear fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 13% fail on Fog lamp (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.58% fail on Tell tale (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.12% fail on Switch
    • 7.5% fail on Position lamps
      • 4.7% fail on Front lamps
      • 3.1% fail on Rear lamps
      • 0.12% fail on All position lamps
    • 6.3% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 5.8% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 4.0% fail on Stop lamp (34% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 3.3% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.3% fail on Headlamp
    • 2.2% fail on Rear reflectors (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.7% fail on Direction indicators (52% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.7% fail on Flashing type (52% better than other 2000 vans)
        • 1.2% fail on Individual lamps
        • 0.47% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.12% fail on All direction indicators
    • 1.2% fail on Trailer electrical socket (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.2% fail on Horn (58% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.58% fail on Battery (72% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.35% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.12% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.12% fail on Lamp
    • 0.12% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
  • 22% fail on Suspension
    • 5.5% fail on Suspension arms
      • 2.9% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 2.4% fail on Condition (19 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.23% fail on Attachment
    • 5.4% fail on Leaf springs (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 2.7% fail on Pins and bushes (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 2.1% fail on Shackle (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 0.58% fail on Anchor (5 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 2.4% fail on Condition (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.35% fail on Securing bolts (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.23% fail on Anchor bracket
      • 0.12% fail on Shackle bracket
    • 5.2% fail on Drive shafts (47% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 5.1% fail on Front drive shafts
        • 5.1% fail on Constant velocity joints (48% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.12% fail on Any drive shaft which is part of the suspension
        • 0.12% fail on Universal joint
    • 4.8% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.9% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 1.3% fail on Linkage condition (170% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.2% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.58% fail on Attachment
    • 4.2% fail on Front suspension joints (66% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 3.8% fail on Prescribed areas (65% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 2.2% fail on Spring mounting (47% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.5% fail on Component mounting (78% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.35% fail on Subframe mounting (84% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 3.3% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 3.3% fail on Front (110% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 2.1% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 2.1% fail on Condition
    • 0.23% fail on Tie bars/rods
      • 0.12% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.12% fail on Attachment
  • 20% fail on Brakes
    • 13% fail on Brake performance
      • 7.8% fail on Rear wheels (42% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 6.4% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 2.8% fail on Front wheels (43% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 2.1% fail on Service brake performance
      • 1.4% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.35% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 8.3% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 6.6% fail on Components (30% better than other 2000 vans)
        • 5.1% fail on Pipes
        • 1.6% fail on Valves
        • 0.58% fail on Reservoirs
        • 0.23% fail on Hoses (88% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 2.0% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp (5 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.70% fail on Leaks
    • 2.8% fail on Hub components
      • 2.8% fail on Brake pads (100% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.6% fail on Mechanical components (170% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.0% fail on Cable
      • 0.23% fail on Lever (7 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.23% fail on Pivot (8 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.12% fail on Linkage
      • 0.12% fail on Clevis joint
    • 1.0% fail on Parking brake
      • 1.0% fail on Condition
    • 1.0% fail on Restricted movement (140% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.58% fail on Service brake control components
      • 0.58% fail on Pedal
        • 0.35% fail on Anti-slip
        • 0.23% fail on Condition
    • 0.12% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.12% fail on Actuating linkage mounting
  • 9.7% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 6.1% fail on Wipers
    • 3.6% fail on Washers
    • 0.35% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.23% fail on Bonnet
    • 0.23% fail on Mirrors
  • 8.4% fail on Steering
    • 7.7% fail on Steering system
      • 5.2% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.81% fail on Other components (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 0.81% fail on Steering pivot point (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.70% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.58% fail on Drag link end (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.35% fail on Intermediate drop arm (39 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.35% fail on Steering arm
      • 0.23% fail on Free play
        • 0.23% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.23% fail on Steering box
      • 0.12% fail on Steering damper
    • 0.70% fail on Power steering
      • 0.23% fail on Pipes and hoses
      • 0.12% fail on Operation
      • 0.12% fail on Drive system
      • 0.12% fail on Pump
      • 0.12% fail on Other components
    • 0.23% fail on Locking devices
    • 0.12% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 5.5% fail on Tyres
    • 4.1% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.6% fail on Condition (52% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.12% fail on Size/type
    • 0.12% fail on Valve stem
  • 5.2% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions (39% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 3.6% fail on Exhaust system (36% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.3% fail on Emissions
    • 0.47% fail on Fuel system (70% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.23% fail on System
      • 0.12% fail on Tank
      • 0.12% fail on Cap
    • 0.35% fail on Emissions not tested
  • 5.1% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 4.7% fail on Seat belts
      • 3.7% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.93% fail on Condition
    • 0.58% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 0.58% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
  • 4.9% fail on Body, Structure and General Items (41% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 3.5% fail on Body condition
    • 1.2% fail on Vehicle structure (55% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.2% fail on Chassis (55% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.23% fail on Body security
    • 0.23% fail on Doors
      • 0.12% fail on Drivers
      • 0.12% fail on Passengers other
  • 1.5% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 1.5% fail on Registration plate
  • 1.2% fail on Towbars (150% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.81% fail on Towbar (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 0.35% fail on Vehicle structure
  • 0.35% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.35% fail on Attachment