Chevrolet Camaro — MOT statistics 2024
The Chevrolet Camaro failed 12.6% of 500 first MOT attempts in 2024 ("first-time", excluding retests). Adjusted for the age of the fleet, its initial-failure ratio is 41.2 (100 = expected for its age profile). This car fails its MOT about 59% less often than expected for its age. Small sample — treat with care.
Age-adjusted peer: Toyota Vellfire (index 40.9) — the two published results are 0.3 index points apart.
Chevrolet Camaro common problems: what actually fails the MOT
Suspension is well below the reference at 5.0 per 100 tests, against 13.4 per 100 tests across UK vehicles of the same ages.
higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests
family vs national — matched to UK vehicles of the same ages — top component groups, per 100 tests. Legend: This family · National avg. Combined labels: family / national average. A gap here reflects how these vehicles are driven, used and maintained as well as how they were built — an MOT defect is a test outcome, not a breakdown.
Component-group comparison table
Each ratio carries a 95% interval. With 6 groups compared here, roughly one apparent difference in twenty is chance alone, and 1 of these is already inside an interval that includes 1.00×.
| Group | This family | Cases behind it | UK, same ages | Family / national |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lamps & electrical | 22.1 | 617 | 15.9 | 1.39×1.28–1.51 |
| Brakes | 6.7 | 186 | 10.9 | 0.61×0.52–0.70 |
| Visibility | 5.3 | 149 | 7.5 | 0.70×0.60–0.83 |
| Suspension | 5.0 | 141 | 13.3 | 0.37×0.32–0.45 |
| Emissions & leaks | 4.1 | 114 | 3.5 | 1.15×0.95–1.38 · not distinguishable |
| Tyres | 3.9 | 110 | 7.9 | 0.49×0.41–0.60 |
| What failed | per 100 tests (this family) | per 100 tests (UK average) | ratio family / UK | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lamp emitted colour, position or intensity not in…Lamp emitted colour, position or intensity not in accordance with the requirements | 3.90 | 0.85 | 4.60× | Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure |
| Direction indicator lamp missing, inoperative or…A direction indicator lamp missing, inoperative or in the case of a multiple light source more than 1/2 not functioning | 2.61 | 0.60 | 4.36× | Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure |
| Obligatory rear fog lamp missing, or a front or…An obligatory rear fog lamp missing, or a front or rear fog lamp inoperative or in the case of a multiple light source more than 1/2 not functioning | 2.29 | 0.43 | 5.38× | Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure |
| Aim of a headlamp is not within limits laid down…The aim of a headlamp is not within limits laid down in the requirements | 3.15 | 2.57 | 1.23× | Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure |
Named defects ranked by how much more often they appear than the national average — not by raw rate.
Chevrolet Camaro MOT advisories: what gets flagged
Tyres are highest at 20.4 per 100 tests; Body & structure are lowest at 3.0 per 100 tests — the gap is 17.4 per 100 tests.
higher bar = flagged more oftenadvisory items per 100 initial tests
Advisory rates table
| Group | Advisories per 100 |
|---|---|
| Tyres | 20.4 |
| Brakes | 16.1 |
| Suspension | 13.3 |
| Emissions & leaks | 4.4 |
| Body & structure | 3 |
| Non-component advisories | 3 |
Advisories are wear the tester noted but didn't fail — what will need money soon.
If a car like this fails, does it fail again?
A failure rate does not say whether a failure is a one-off or the start of something. This follows the same vehicles into their next ordinary MOT a year later — retests after a repair are excluded, because they follow a failure by definition. 2019-2024.
| After this year's test | Fails next year | Vehicles followed |
|---|---|---|
| It failed | 17.4% | 144 |
| It passed | 10.7% | 1,491 |
A failed test raises next year's chance of failing again by 6.7 percentage points. The failure most likely to come back is lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment — 23.1% of those vehicles fail again next year. Some of this is the vehicle and some is the owner: a car that was let go once tends to be let go again. One caveat: a car that fails may be sold or scrapped rather than tested again, so these figures describe the vehicles that came back.
Adjusted for how much these are actually driven
The headline index adjusts for the fleet's age. Wear, though, follows mileage: a three-year-old taxi and a three-year-old garage queen sit in the same age band. These two rows compare every car with vehicles of the same age, and then with vehicles of the same age and the same annual mileage, 2019-2024, on 2,672 tests. Both stand on the six-year corpus so they are measured on identical data — compare them with each other, not with the headline index above, which is measured on 2024 alone.
| Standardised for | Index | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Age only | 54.6 | fails less often than expected |
| Age and annual mileage | 64.6 | fails less often than vehicles driven as much |
| Share doing under 3,000 miles a year | 35.8% | a large low-use population — often second vehicles or cars kept for occasional use |
Split by how much each car is driven. This is a split by annual mileage, not by body type — the MOT record does not say whether a car is a conversion. Within each band the index compares with vehicles of the same age driven as much.
| Miles a year | Tests | Failed first time | Index within band |
|---|---|---|---|
| under 3,000 | 956 | 11.2% | 61.6 |
| 3,000–6,000 | 880 | 14.4% | 57.2 |
| 6,000–9,000 | 504 | 17.1% | 57.8 |
Mileage matters here: matching on how much these are driven moves the figure by 10.0 points — this fleet is driven less than the vehicles it is measured against, so the age-only view flatters it — but it does not change which side of normal the car sits on. One limit to keep in mind: mileage is partly a result of how often a car breaks down — one that spends weeks in the workshop covers fewer miles — so the mileage-matched figure can understate a real weakness. Tests with no usable odometer reading are left out of it.
How the Chevrolet Camaro compares with cars of its own age and size
Not against the whole fleet — against cars of the same size class tested at the same age, 2019-2024.
| Age | Chevrolet Camaro | Same class, same age | Difference | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 years | 10.71% | 10.77% | -0.06 pp | 168 |
| 4 years | 10.53% | 12.34% | -1.82 pp | 171 |
| 5 years | 15.74% | 14.16% | +1.57 pp | 197 |
| 6 years | 12.05% | 16.08% | -4.03 pp | 224 |
| 7 years | 16.51% | 18.24% | -1.73 pp | 218 |
| 8 years | 13.95% | 20.54% | -6.59 pp | 215 |
| 9 years | 11.34% | 23.09% | -11.75 pp | 194 |
| 10 years | 12.61% | 25.6% | -12.99 pp | 222 |
| 11 years | 16.76% | 28.23% | -11.47 pp | 173 |
| 12 years | 12.43% | 30.56% | -18.14 pp | 169 |
Raw first-time failure rates within each age, so fleet age cannot flatter either side. A positive difference means this model fails more often than its own class at that age.
How does the Chevrolet Camaro perform as it gets older?
Chart axes: car age, years · failure-rate scale 0–47%.
Takeaway: solid line: this family; dashed: all cars.
Data table
| Age | Chevrolet Camaro | All vehicles | Gap |
|---|
How dangerous are Chevrolet Camaro MOT failures?
Major defects are well below the reference at 38.8 per 100 tests, against 52.8 per 100 tests nationally.
higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests
Severity table
| Severity | This family /100 | National /100 | Family / national |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minor | 10.20 | 14.22 | 0.72× |
| Major | 38.82 | 52.75 | 0.74× |
| Dangerous | 4.97 | 11.15 | 0.45× |
Chart values: Minor 10.2 · Major 38.8 · Dangerous 5.0.
Per 100 tests on this family. National average: Minor 14.2 · Major 52.8 · Dangerous 11.2 per 100.
Does the month of a Chevrolet Camaro MOT matter?
Jan is highest at 21.0%; Jun is lowest at 10.8% — the gap is 10.1 percentage points.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
Chart scale: 9%–33%.
bars: Chevrolet Camaro · dashed: all class-4 cars
Month-by-month table
| Month | Chevrolet Camaro | All vehicles | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan | 20.95% | 31.12% | -10.2 pp |
| Feb | 16.84% | 29.99% | -13.1 pp |
| Mar | 11.59% | 28.26% | -16.7 pp |
| Apr | 17.26% | 29.78% | -12.5 pp |
| May | 14.81% | 28.79% | -14.0 pp |
| Jun | 10.83% | 28.15% | -17.3 pp |
| Jul | 16.28% | 29.33% | -13.0 pp |
| Aug | 12.18% | 29.2% | -17.0 pp |
| Sep | 13.72% | 28.19% | -14.5 pp |
| Oct | 15.77% | 30.34% | -14.6 pp |
| Nov | 19.77% | 30.58% | -10.8 pp |
| Dec | 10.98% | 29.33% | -18.3 pp |
Takeaway: the spread between best and worst month is 10.1 percentage points — noticeable seasonality. Seasonality partly reflects registration-date clustering, not weather.
Before reading the shape: most of it is not about cars. Britain changes its registration plates twice a year, and 18.9% of these cars were first registered in March with another17.1% in September — 36% in two months against the 17% an even spread would give. An MOT falls due three years after first registration, so the buying calendar becomes the testing calendar. That shapes how many cars are tested each month — not how often they fail: the busiest months here are not the worst ones, so read the failure line on its own and the volume behind it separately.
Chevrolet Camaro average mileage by age
Does high mileage mean more Chevrolet Camaro MOT failures at the same age?
Within the same age group, split by odometer (2024 MOTs), so this separates wear from age: at ages 10–14, 4.3% of those with under 40,000 miles failed first time versus 12.2% of those with 40,000–70,000 miles.No clear mileage gap inside this age group, among cars still being tested.
| Age | Odometer | % failing | 95% interval | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10–14 | <40k miles | 4.3% | 1.5–12% | 69 (rough estimate) |
| 10–14 | 40-70k miles | 12.2% | 6.5–21.5% | 74 (rough estimate) |
line: median · band: middle half of the fleet (p25–p75)
Mileage by age (p25 / median / p75)
| Age | p25 | Median | p75 | Tests |
|---|
Where in Britain the Chevrolet Camaro fails its MOT most
Ipswich area stands out at 31.3%.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
| Toughest areas | % failing | vs model overall |
|---|---|---|
| Ipswich (IP) | 31.3% | +16.1 pp |
| Easiest areas | % failing | vs model overall |
|---|
Every dot is a postcode area — size = how many were tested there, colour = share failing. These figures are not age-adjusted: coastal and rural areas often run older fleets and salted roads, so higher raw fail rates do not automatically mean a worse local stock of this model.
Map labels: Scotland · N. England · Wales · London · S. West.
Chevrolet Camaro survival: which cars are still on the road
By age 14 is well below the reference at 35.0%, against 100.0% at the ages 4–6 reference level.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
Chart axes: car age, years · survival vs ages 4–6 · scale 0–105%.
Survival vs fail rate by age
| Age | Tests | Survival vs ages 4–6 | Fail % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 168 | 85.1% | 10.71% |
| 4 | 171 | 86.7% | 10.53% |
| 5 | 197 | 99.8% | 15.74% |
| 6 | 224 | 100% | 12.05% |
| 7 | 218 | 100% | 16.51% |
| 8 | 215 | 100% | 13.95% |
| 9 | 194 | 98.3% | 11.34% |
| 10 | 222 | 100% | 12.61% |
| 11 | 173 | 87.7% | 16.76% |
| 12 | 169 | 85.6% | 12.43% |
| 13 | 121 | 61.3% | 17.36% |
| 14 | 69 | 35% | 11.59% |
By age 14, only about 35% as many cars of this family present for MOT as at ages 4–6 (reference n≈197); survivors still fail at 11.6% vs 10.5% at age 4. Older cars that still appear are a selected subset — weaker ones have already left.
How many years is a Chevrolet Camaro likely to last?
Bought at age 5 is highest at 8.2 years; Bought at age 12 is lowest at 1.6 years — the gap is 6.6 years.
bigger number = longer remaining lifeyears on the observed survival curve
| Age now | Typical mileage (p50) | Expected years left |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | — | 8.2 |
| 8 | — | 5.2 |
| 10 | — | at least 3.2 |
| 12 | — | at least 1.6 |
estimateEstimate only — not a warranty: a typical 10-year-old example of this family has at least 3.2 expected years of further MOT-present life. The curve is observed only until age 14, so the true figure is likely higher.
Chevrolet Camaro faults that come together
Emissions & leaks + Suspension stand out at 10.22×, against 1.00× if the faults were independent.
above 1.0× = more than expectedbelow 1.0× = less
| Group A | Group B | Together | Lift |
|---|---|---|---|
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Suspension | 26 | 10.22× (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Suspension | 24 | 8.01× (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Noise, emissions and leaks | 20 | 7.61× (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | 20 | 6.93× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Steering | 31 | 6.61× (rough estimate) |
| Tyres | Visibility | 20 | 6.6× (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | 52 | 6.2× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Visibility | 56 | 5.5× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Tyres | 37 | 5.47× (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Visibility | 20 | 5.32× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Suspension | 42 | 5.18× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Noise, emissions and leaks | 36 | 5.05× (rough estimate) |
| Suspension | Visibility | 19 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Brakes | 17 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Identification of the vehicle | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | 17 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Steering | Suspension | 16 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Steering | 16 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Suspension | Tyres | 16 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Tyres | 16 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Visibility | 16 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Steering | 15 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Noise, emissions and leaks | 13 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Steering | Visibility | 13 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Steering | 12 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Visibility | 11 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | 11 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Identification of the vehicle | Noise, emissions and leaks | 10 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Suspension | 10 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Steering | Tyres | 10 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | 9 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | 8 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Identification of the vehicle | Suspension | 8 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | 7 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | Visibility | 7 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Identification of the vehicle | 6 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | Steering | 5 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | Suspension | 5 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Tyres | 5 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Tyres | 5 | too few (rough estimate) |
Defects in «Noise, emissions and leaks» and «Suspension» appear together 10.22× more often than chance (26 co-occurrences in the same test; 66 pairs compared).
Lift = how many times more often both groups appear on the same test than if independent. A pair is listed from 5 tests with both faults; the lift is shown from 20, and called above chance only when its 95% interval excludes 1 (see rough estimates).
Is low mileage better for a Chevrolet Camaro?
Cars driven under 5,000 miles a year is well below the reference at 8.2%, against 17.4% for cars driven 8,000–12,000 miles a year.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
| Band | Fail % | Tests |
|---|---|---|
| <5k miles/year | 8.15% | 237 |
| 8–12k miles/year | 17.39% | 69 |
| Gap (low − normal) | -9.23 pp | — |
By fuel and age
Petrol
| Age | Low-use fail % | n | Normal fail % | n | Gap pp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | 9.32 | 118 | 10.53 | 38 | -1.2 pp |
| 10 | 6.72 | 119 | 25.81 | 31 | -19.08 pp |
At matched ages 5–14, cars averaging under 5k miles/year fail at 8.2% vs 17.4% for 8–12k miles/year — 9.2 pp, interval includes no difference (n_low=237, n_normal=69). The gap interval includes no difference, so no higher/lower claim is made.
Chevrolet Camaro MOT repair costs
The MOT-failure repair budget per test runs from £61.70 to £117.23, against £54.85 for the test itself.
bigger number = costs morepounds per test, MOT-failing faults only
| Component | Fails per 100 tests | Typical repair | Its price | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | 22.1 (nat. 18.09) | Battery replacement (standard 12V lead-acid) | £140 | £30.94 |
| Brakes | 6.7 (nat. 11.25) | Front brake pads (parts + labour, typical hatchback) | £150 | £10.05 |
| Suspension | 5.0 (nat. 15.36) | Suspension coil spring (single corner) | £180 | £9.00 |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | 4.1 (nat. 3.67) | Exhaust rear silencer | £200 | £8.20 |
| Tyres | 3.9 (nat. 8.7) | Tyre (single mid-range 16" fitted) | £90 | £3.51 |
Multiply how often each component fails on this model by what that repair usually costs, and you get the amount an owner should expect to budget per test for MOT-failing faults only — roughly £62 to £117, on top of the test fee itself. It is a budgeting figure, not a quote: the spread between a set of pads and a set of discs is most of the range.
Prices are modal quotes from a hand-kept catalogue of published UK garage guides — we do not scrape the booking sites, their terms forbid it, so this list is short and updated by hand with a source and date against each line. Each line prices one typical repair in that group, not a full remedy, and only groups our catalogue actually covers are counted. The contrast worth noticing is the second card: the legal maximum for the test has been £54.85 since 2010, while the repairs it uncovers have followed inflation the whole time.
For scale from a different direction: Warrantywise, which sees used-car warranty claims rather than test failures, puts the average claim at £2,052 across the ten highest-claim models it ranks and £539 for Honda, the lowest-claim make in its index (Warrantywise index 2026, 1.6 million claims, cars aged 3–15). Those sit an order of magnitude above the figures in this table, and the gap is the point: a warranty claim is a gearbox or an engine, which almost never fails an MOT, while the faults that do fail one are corrosion, lamps and tyres, which no warranty pays for. The two numbers answer different questions and neither replaces the other.
Chevrolet Camaro rust problems: where they corrode
Salt-belt exposure is well below the reference at 15th percentile, against 50th percentile as the middle of published models.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
This Chevrolet Camaro has too few tests to judge for corrosion once age is held constant, and its owners live in areas that are gentler than most for the models we publish.
Corrosion is the one failure mode that is as much about geography as about the car. We keep the two apart on purpose: a model can look rusty simply because it is popular in Scotland, and a model can look clean simply because it is bought in Surrey. Blending them into a single score would hide which of the two is doing the work.
Exposure is this model's tests weighted by an area corrosion index built from frost days, salt load and distance to the coast — the composite validated at r = 0.42 against corrosion defects we actually record. It is published as a rank, not a raw score, because every mainstream model skews towards low-corrosion areas for the simple reason that most of Britain's cars are in the south. Susceptibility is standardised to the national age profile, so an old fleet does not get labelled a rusty model.
What will fail next on a Chevrolet Camaro?
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment after a failure at age 20+ are highest at 21.7%; Tyres after a passed at age 3-5 are lowest at 1.6% — the gap is 20.1 percentage points.
higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability
| Age | Last test | Most likely next failures | Cars tracked |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3-5 | passed | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 3.5% · Noise, emissions and leaks 1.9% · Tyres 1.6% | 313 (rough estimate) |
| 3-5 | advisory | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 8.2% | 61 (rough estimate) |
| 3-5 | failure | Visibility 11.3% | 53 (rough estimate) |
| 6-8 | passed | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 3.7% · Visibility 3.4% · Tyres 2.1% | 326 (rough estimate) |
| 6-8 | advisory | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 9.0% | 78 (rough estimate) |
| 6-8 | failure | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 11.4% · Visibility 7.1% | 70 (rough estimate) |
| 9-11 | passed | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 5.4% · Noise, emissions and leaks 2.4% · Suspension 2.4% | 297 (rough estimate) |
| 9-11 | advisory | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 14.5% · Visibility 6.6% | 76 (rough estimate) |
| 9-11 | failure | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 13.1% · Suspension 8.2% | 61 (rough estimate) |
| 20+ | passed | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 10.0% · Brakes 8.8% · Steering 4.4% | 160 (rough estimate) |
| 20+ | advisory | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 15.3% · Visibility 9.4% · Brakes 8.2% | 85 (rough estimate) |
| 20+ | failure | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 21.7% · Visibility 8.7% | 69 (rough estimate) |
The same chains, cut differently: given a car's age and how its last test went, which component most often causes trouble at the following one.
The pattern that repeats across every family: a failure at one test roughly doubles the chance of a failure on the same component at the next one, and an advisory sits about half-way between a clean pass and a failure. Age bands in years; probabilities are per car, not per defect item.
Chevrolet Camaro ownership: what six years of MOTs show
Clean three-test streak is highest at 63.0%; Repeated the same advisory is lowest at 12.9% — the gap is 50.1 percentage points.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
Per mile driven, not per year. Dividing failures by the miles that actually went onto the odometers between consecutive tests gives 0.497 failures per 10,000 miles, on a median of 1,452 miles a year across 599 chains. This is the number to compare between models — an annual rate quietly rewards cars that barely leave the drive.
Two populations hide inside one model. 62.96% of these cars strung together three or more tests with nothing recorded at all, while 12.87% carried the same advisory three times or more — the same fault, noted, ignored, noted again. When you buy used you are buying one of those two histories, and the MOT record shows which.
Odometer anomalies: 6.71% of 611 chains show a reading lower than the previous test, with a median drop of 34,803 miles. We call this an anomaly and not fraud on purpose — instrument swaps, imports, unit mix-ups and keying errors all land in the same bucket. Obvious typos (drops under 100 miles or over 90% of the reading) are already excluded.
Chevrolet Camaro owner complaints: what goes wrong
US market, Chevrolet CAMARO and its variants, model years 2015–2022 only. A count of owner complaints, not a UK failure rate; NHTSA has no UK denominator.
Lamps & electrical are highest at 214; Visibility is lowest at 37 — the gap is 177.
bigger number = more recorded casescompare like-for-like scope, not sample size alone
| Component | Complaints | Share | MOT fail items per 100 | MOT rank | Agreement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lamps & electrical | 214 | 29.4% | 22.1 | #1 | complained about and fails often |
| Transmission (not MOT-tested) | 180 | 24.7% | not in top 6 | — | complained about, rarely an MOT failure |
| Steering | 118 | 16.2% | not in top 6 | — | complained about, rarely an MOT failure |
| Engine (not MOT-tested) | 107 | 14.7% | not in top 6 | — | complained about, rarely an MOT failure |
| Restraints | 51 | 7.0% | not in top 6 | — | complained about, rarely an MOT failure |
| Visibility | 37 | 5.1% | 5.3 | #3 | complained about and fails often |
Two different populations answering two different questions: the MOT records what an inspector can measure once a year, the complaint file records what annoyed or frightened an owner on the road. A component high in one column and absent from the other is the interesting case — driver-assistance and electronics dominate complaints while almost never appearing as an MOT failure item.
What the reports actually say
2015 Chevrolet Camaro , having malt issues with the ignition switch or solenoid . It will not release the key when put into park. Key will stay stuck for HOURS and will result in a dead battery. I have been dealing with this for months on end. I can’t shirt to fix this even this is a common issue with other Chevys. The dealership advised this should be under recall
The car powered off on me while driving on the interstate causing an extremely dangerous situation for me and other drivers without any warning, no signs the vehicle abruptly stopped I coasted to the side and avoided traffic and started right up but drove rough. It’s fuel and fluids in the car and no check engine lights were on.
US owners have filed 729 complaints about the equivalent Chevrolet Camaro to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, including 45 that mention a crash, 10 a fire and 31 an injury. These are owner reports, not verified findings — but they are the only large public record of what drivers themselves notice, and they cover the years between MOT tests.
Caveat worth stating plainly: US-specification cars, self-selected reporters, no denominator — complaint counts scale with how many cars were sold there and how motivated owners are to file. The mechanical gap matters as much as the statistical one: American cars of the same name often carry different gearboxes, engines and equipment — automatics where Britain buys manuals — so a drivetrain complaint filed in Ohio may describe a part that was never fitted here. Read the ranking inside a model, not between models, and treat drivetrain entries with particular caution. Source: NHTSA ODI consumer complaints (US market, public domain) — US-spec vehicles, indicative only.
Chevrolet Camaro inspection results in other countries
United Kingdom MOT is well below the reference at 12.6%, against 26.0% nationally.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
| Country | Test | This model fails | National average | Position | Sample |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | MOT (class 4) | 12.6% | 26.01% | -13.4 pp | 500 |
| Netherlands | APK | 55.1% | 50.8% | +4.3 pp | 597 |
| Norway | PKK | 40.1% | 33.7% | +6.4 pp | 521 |
The countries disagree about this car, and that is worth saying out loud rather than averaging away. A model can sit above its national average in one country and below it in another because the fleets are not the same cars: different model years, different engines, different roads and salt, and inspection rules that weight components differently. Treat each row as evidence from one regime, not as a verdict.
| Code | Fault | Recorded | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
210 | Tyre pressure not at the correct value | 63 | failure |
RA2 | Excessive leak of other fluids | 61 | advisory |
RA4 | Waarschuwingsinrichting controlesysteem bandenspanning geeft | 53 | advisory |
205 | Tyre with insufficient tread | 47 | failure |
AC4 | Steering or suspension ball joint worn up to 1.0 mm | 44 | advisory |
AC1 | Tyre down to 1.6–2.5 mm of tread | 40 | advisory |
516 | Dipped headlight incorrectly aimed | 27 | failure |
391 | Wipers leave insufficient visibility | 26 | failure |
Worth dwelling on how mundane the top of that list is: tyre pressure, tread depth, headlight aim. The Dutch APK records 1.194 defects per inspection against a much higher national failure rate than Britain's, and the reason is not that Dutch cars are worse — it is that the two regimes draw the line between "note it" and "fail it" in different places. Codes are the RDW's own; the English wording here is our translation of the Dutch original.
Britain is not the only country that inspects every car every year, and the Chevrolet Camaro is on the road in all of them. Each national regime writes its own rules, so the pass rates below are not comparable to each other — what does travel across a border is whether a model sits above or below its own country's average.
Rows with fewer than 500 inspections are not published. Sources: RDW open data — Meldingen Keuringsinstantie + Geconstateerde Gebreken + Gekentekende voertuigen (2024), CC0. Not an RDW endorsement.; Statens vegvesen — Periodisk kjøretøykontroll (PKK) 2024, CC BY 4.0. Adapted; licences and full notice.
Chevrolet Camaro MOT: quick answers
Chevrolet Camaro MOT Risk Index is well below the reference at 41.2, against 100 for a car with the same age profile.
below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age
- What is the Chevrolet Camaro first-time MOT pass rate?
- 87.4% of first attempts passed in 2024 (500 tests). This is the first-time figure: retests after repair are excluded. Basis: first-time, excluding retests.
- Why does this number differ from other sites?
- Other sites often report a pass rate that includes retests or counts all attempts. Our 12.6% figure is the first-time initial failure rate, using 500 primary tests as the denominator (first-time, excluding retests). The age-adjusted MOT initial-failure ratio 41.2 is shown separately because raw rates compare fleet age as well as cars.
Compare the Chevrolet Camaro with other cars
BMW M6 is highest at 42.2; Toyota Vellfire is lowest at 40.9 — the gap is 1.3 points.
below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age
Same brand
All Chevrolet MOT statisticsChevrolet Corvette MOT statsChevrolet Cruze MOT stats
Similar risk
Toyota Vellfire (index 40.9)TVR Chimaera (index 42.1)BMW M6 (index 42.2)
Same size class
how Honda Freed compareshow Nissan Silvia compareshow Nissan 300ZX compares
By area
Chevrolet Camaro MOT failure rate by postcode area
By failure group
Chevrolet Camaro body, chassis and structure failuresChevrolet Camaro brakes failuresChevrolet Camaro vehicle identification failuresChevrolet Camaro lamps, reflectors and electrics failuresChevrolet Camaro noise, emissions and leaks failuresChevrolet Camaro steering failuresChevrolet Camaro suspension failuresChevrolet Camaro tyres failuresChevrolet Camaro visibility failures
Inspections abroad
Chevrolet Camaro in NorwayChevrolet Camaro in the Netherlands
Data details & how to cite
Scope: class-4 vehicles (cars), initial tests only, outcomes pass / fail / fixed-on-the-spot at the station (PRS counts towards the failure rate — the defect was present at arrival). Index = observed initial failures ÷ failures expected for this fleet's exact age profile, ×100; margin of error is a 95% confidence interval. Covers ALL generations together — a 3-year-old and a 15-year-old are very different cars; a generation split is on the roadmap. Dataset release dataset_release_id=dvsa-2024-v2, frozen baseline; headline claim_id=family-stats:chevrolet-camaro:dvsa-2024-v2. Full method: methodology.
Cite: MOT Risk Index (2026). Chevrolet Camaro MOT statistics 2024 (data release dvsa-2024-v2; downloadable dataset motriskindex-families-2024-v5, doi:10.5281/zenodo.22975051). https://motriskindex.co.uk/cars/chevrolet-camaro/ · Published 2026-07-30.