MOT Results

Honest John Classics MOT Results » Lotus » Excel
Do you have a minute to answer an electric vehicle survey? Start the survey | No thanks

Lotus Excel MOT Results

74.8% pass rate
from 143 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 pre-1990 cars and highlighted areas where the Lotus Excel is unusually good or bad.

  • 12% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 3.5% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 2.1% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 1.4% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 3.5% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 3.5% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 2.8% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 0.70% fail on Switch
    • 2.8% fail on Direction indicators
      • 2.8% fail on Flashing type
        • 2.8% fail on Individual direction indicators
    • 2.1% fail on Headlamps
      • 2.1% fail on Headlamp
    • 2.1% fail on Stop lamp
    • 2.1% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 2.1% fail on Horn
    • 1.4% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.70% fail on All position lamps
      • 0.70% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.70% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
  • 8.4% fail on Visibility
    • 5.6% fail on Washers
    • 3.5% fail on Wipers
    • 0.70% fail on Bonnet
    • 0.70% fail on View to rear
      • 0.70% fail on Mirrors
  • 7.0% fail on Suspension
    • 4.2% fail on Suspension arms
      • 2.8% fail on Ball joint dust cover (4 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
      • 0.70% fail on Suspension arm
      • 0.70% fail on Pins and bushes
    • 1.4% fail on Other suspension component
      • 1.4% fail on Ball joint dust cover (9 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
    • 0.70% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 0.70% fail on Springs
      • 0.70% fail on Coil springs
        • 0.70% fail on Coil spring
    • 0.70% fail on Shock absorbers
  • 5.6% fail on Brakes
    • 2.8% fail on Brake performance
      • 2.1% fail on Service brake performance
        • 2.1% fail on Rbt
          • 2.1% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.70% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 0.70% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 0.70% fail on Rbt (sp)
    • 2.1% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 1.4% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 1.4% fail on Pedal
  • 3.5% fail on Steering
    • 2.1% fail on Steering gear
      • 2.1% fail on Steering rack
    • 1.4% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 1.4% fail on Track rod end
    • 0.70% fail on Power steering
      • 0.70% fail on Other components
    • 0.70% fail on Steering coupling
      • 0.70% fail on Universal joint
  • 3.5% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 1.4% fail on Exhaust system
    • 1.4% fail on Doors
      • 1.4% fail on Front passenger's door (4 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
        • 1.4% fail on Door condition (5 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
    • 0.70% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 0.70% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 0.70% fail on Seats
      • 0.70% fail on Driver's seat
  • 2.1% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 2.1% fail on Seat belts
      • 2.1% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 0.70% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 0.70% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 0.70% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.70% fail on Non catalyst emissions
  • 0.70% fail on Tyres
    • 0.70% fail on Condition
    • 0.70% fail on Tread depth
Read the Honest John Review

  • Lotus Excel 1982
    Great handling and ride, excellent performance/economy, much improved quality over earlier cars thanks to some Toyota parts sharing