MOT Analysis

[Frank]

This is info obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the, er, HonestJohn website. To be honest, I reckon, this stuff is more under the category of 'Vaguely Interesting' rather than being of any actual use.

Still, might be useful to someone -

https://good-garage-guide.honestjohn.co.uk/mot-results/

https://good-garage-guide.honestjohn.co.uk/mot/ford/puma

https://good-garage-guide.honestjohn.co.uk/mot-data-the-mot-files-2017/the-mot-files-bottom-10-cars-from-the-1990s/?image=8

 

[Ian G]

Thoughts on the stats

Pass rate by mileage likely to be largely skewed for older cars, ie. you could have 100k cars that are far younger. Sample size probably puts a 2000 year Puma with 100k along side five cars manufactured 2010 fresh out of a lease maintenance contract.

All small /cheap / old cars will do worse than the mean.

By age less of a discrepancy, can't really dispute that one, probably does figure that they rust. Again also cheap car and frequently not cared for or you'd chance a test and see what happens knowing it will probably fail.

Suspension no surprise - bushes often neglected.

Brakes and tyres - yes when the the job is 20% of the value of the car.

Surprising to see body structure so low down - thought it would be more prominent.

45.6% pass says a lot about how many are being scrapped which we already know. That figure will hopefully start going up in future analysis.