MOT Results

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

Nissan Figaro MOT Results

40.4% pass rate
from 57 tests in 2020
(120% worse than other pre-1990 cars)
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 Nissan Figaro is unusually good or bad.

  • 19% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 11% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (3 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
      • 11% fail on Rear fog lamp (3 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
        • 8.8% fail on Rear fog lamp (2 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
        • 3.5% fail on Switch (14 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
    • 5.3% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 3.5% fail on Horn
      • 1.8% fail on Battery(ies)
    • 1.8% fail on Headlamps
      • 1.8% fail on Headlamp
    • 1.8% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 1.8% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 1.8% fail on Position lamps
      • 1.8% fail on Position lamp
    • 1.8% fail on Mandatory tell-tales
      • 1.8% fail on Main beam tell-tale
  • 19% fail on Suspension (140% worse than other pre-1990 cars)
    • 16% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas (4 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
    • 1.8% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 1.8% fail on Suspension arms
      • 1.8% fail on Ball joint dust cover
  • 18% fail on Body, chassis, structure (160% worse than other pre-1990 cars)
    • 7.0% fail on Transmission (4 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
      • 5.3% fail on Drive shafts (3 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
        • 5.3% fail on Joints (4 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
      • 1.8% fail on Prop shafts
        • 1.8% fail on Joints
    • 5.3% fail on Exhaust system
    • 3.5% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 3.5% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
    • 1.8% fail on Fuel system
      • 1.8% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device
    • 1.8% fail on Bumpers
    • 1.8% fail on Doors
      • 1.8% fail on Front passenger's door
        • 1.8% fail on Door condition
    • 1.8% fail on Cabs
      • 1.8% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 11% fail on Brakes
    • 8.8% fail on Brake performance
      • 5.3% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 5.3% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 5.3% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 3.5% fail on Service brake performance
        • 3.5% fail on Rbt
          • 1.8% fail on Service brake performance
          • 1.8% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 3.5% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp)
        • 3.5% fail on Rbt (sp)
      • 1.8% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 1.8% fail on Rbt
          • 1.8% fail on Parking brake performance
    • 1.8% fail on Rigid brake pipes
    • 1.8% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 1.8% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 1.8% fail on Brake pads
      • 1.8% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.8% fail on Brake discs
  • 11% fail on Visibility
    • 7.0% fail on Washers
    • 5.3% fail on Wipers
  • 8.8% fail on Steering
    • 7.0% fail on Steering gear (4 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
      • 7.0% fail on Steering rack (5 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
    • 1.8% fail on Prescribed areas
    • 1.8% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 1.8% fail on Track rod end
  • 7.0% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 5.3% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 5.3% fail on Spark ignition
        • 3.5% fail on Non catalyst emissions
        • 1.8% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 1.8% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 1.8% fail on Engine oil leaks
  • 7.0% fail on Tyres (3 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
    • 3.5% fail on Tread depth
    • 1.8% fail on Size/type
    • 1.8% fail on Condition
  • 5.3% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 5.3% fail on Seat belts
      • 5.3% fail on Prescribed areas (3 times worse than other pre-1990 cars)
Read the Honest John Review