LTI TX4 — MOT statistics 2024

The LTI TX4 failed 37.66% of 12,160 first MOT attempts in 2024 ("first-time", excluding retests). Adjusted for the age of the fleet, its initial-failure ratio is 120.7 (100 = expected for its age profile). This car fails its MOT about 21% more often than expected for its age.

Age-adjusted peer: Seat Ibiza (index 120.6) — the two published results are 0.1 index points apart.

LTI TX4 common problems: what actually fails the MOT

Suspension stands out at 31.8 per 100 tests, against 14.7 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.

Named defects ranked by how much more often they appear than the national average — not by raw rate.

LTI TX4 MOT advisories: what gets flagged

Suspension is highest at 28.9 per 100 tests; Lamps & electrical are lowest at 3.0 per 100 tests — the gap is 25.9 per 100 tests.

higher bar = flagged more oftenadvisory items per 100 initial tests

Advisories are wear the tester noted but didn't fail — what will need money soon.

Tyres, brakes and suspension: LTI TX4 against cars of the same age

Failing items per 100 initial tests, 2019-2024. The comparison group is every petrol or diesel car tested at the same age, so weight and drivetrain show up rather than fleet age.

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.

A failed test raises next year's chance of failing again by 13.4 percentage points. The failure most likely to come back is lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment — 37.4% 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 98,446 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.

Mileage matters here: matching on how much these are driven moves the figure by 22.0 points — this fleet works harder than the vehicles it is measured against, so the age-only view penalises 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 LTI TX4 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.

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 LTI TX4 perform as it gets older?

The TX4 at age 7 stands out at 31.6%, against 20.2% for all vehicles of the same age.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Chart axes: car age, years · failure-rate scale 0–47%.

Takeaway: a 10-year-old TX4 has roughly a 40% chance of failing its MOT.

How dangerous are LTI TX4 MOT failures?

Major defects stand out at 84.4 per 100 tests, against 52.8 per 100 tests nationally.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

Chart values: Minor 13.4 · Major 84.4 · Dangerous 9.8.

Per 100 tests on this family. National average: Minor 14.2 · Major 52.8 · Dangerous 11.2 per 100.

Does the month of a LTI TX4 MOT matter?

Jul is highest at 39.3%; Aug is lowest at 37.3% — the gap is 2.0 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Chart scale: 27%–41%.

bars: LTI TX4 · dashed: all class-4 cars

Takeaway: the spread between best and worst month is 2.0 percentage points — booking month barely matters for this family. 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.

LTI TX4 average mileage by age

At age 8, the middle half of TX4s runs from 136,407 miles to 191,519 miles, against 162,067 miles as the median.

further right = more milesmedian is the typical car; band is p25–p75

Chart axes: car age, years · odometer scale 0–385k mi.

Does high mileage mean more LTI TX4 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, 34.5% of those with 70,000–100,000 miles failed first time versus 39.4% of those with over 140,000 miles.No clear mileage gap inside this age group, among cars still being tested.

line: median · band: middle half of the fleet (p25–p75)

A typical 8-year-old TX4 has ~162,067 miles on the clock. Much more — ask why; much less — check for gaps in the MOT history.

Where in Britain the LTI TX4 fails its MOT most

London SW area is highest at 61.8%; Slough area is lowest at 10.1% — the gap is 51.7 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Toughest areas	% failing	vs model overall
London SW (SW)	61.77%	+23.6 pp
Edinburgh (EH)	55.21%	+17.0 pp
Chester (CH)	51.49%	+13.3 pp
Birmingham (B)	51.44%	+13.2 pp
Kingston upon Thames (KT)	49.85%	+11.6 pp

Easiest areas	% failing	vs model overall
Slough (SL)	10.07%	-28.1 pp
London W (W)	11.12%	-27.1 pp
Motherwell (ML)	11.8%	-26.4 pp
Sutton (SM)	12.42%	-25.8 pp
Watford (WD)	14.72%	-23.5 pp

Why do areas differ?

For each external factor we correlate the area fail rate with the factor across postcode areas that have ≥800 tests of this family, then compare the bottom vs top fifth (quintile) of the factor. Correlation, not causation — factors travel together (the north is colder and often poorer; urban areas are denser and less salted). Road surface condition is joined now, for the 91 English areas the DfT publishes, and it explains nothing: the correlation with suspension failures is −0.01 and with body and structure failures 0.07. Potholes wreck wheels and tyres between tests, but by the time a car reaches the bay the road it drives on leaves no measurable trace.

In areas with the highest urban share this model fails 17.9 pp less often than in the lowest fifth (r=-0.38, n=23 areas with ≥800 tests).

In areas with the highest road-salt proxy this model fails 5.1 pp more often than in the lowest fifth (r=0.18, n=23 areas with ≥800 tests).

In areas with the highest frost days this model fails 0.8 pp less often than in the lowest fifth (r=0.13, n=23 areas with ≥800 tests).

Values shown in the quintile chart

Factor	Low Q	High Q	Gap	Correlation
Urban share	44.6%	26.6%	-18.0 pp	r=-0.38
Road-salt proxy	40.4%	45.5%	+5.1 pp	r=0.18
Frost days	42.1%	41.3%	-0.8 pp	r=0.13

Factors that only mean something combined

Some conditions are useless on their own and informative multiplied together. Frost days alone say little — Britain barely freezes. Salt tonnage alone says little — it tracks frost. Distance to the sea alone says little. Multiply the first two and divide by the third and you get an index of how hard an area attacks a car's underside, and it lines up with the corrosion defects we actually record. We built five such combinations and tested each against our own data. Three survived; two did not, and the failures are listed here on purpose — a proxy that was never checked is decoration. One survivor only survived on the second attempt: built from a crude stand-in for street parking it failed outright, and rebuilt from the census — terraced streets carrying more cars than they have driveways — it works, and carries information the salt index does not.

Composite area indicators, each tested against a defect rate we measure

Composite	Built from	Tested against	r	Verdict
Underbody corrosion	frost days × salt load ÷ (distance to coast + 1)	share of tests with a corrosion defect	+0.42	holds (116 areas)
Tyre wear	rain days × annual miles ÷ age at first tyre advisory	share of tests failing on tyres	+0.45	holds (116 areas)
Overnight corrosion	terraced housing × cars per household × frost days	share with a corrosion defect	+0.41	holds (102 areas) — and adds signal beyond the first index
Deferred maintenance	deprivation × advisory-to-failure conversion ÷ labour rate	cars repeating the same advisory	−0.26	fails (118 areas)
Powertrain stress	engine capacity ÷ kerb weight	suspension, brake and emissions failures	−0.16	fails (22 models)

The deprivation result is the one worth dwelling on. The intuition that poorer areas defer repairs is strong enough that most people treat it as established. We tested it twice — once on raw failure rates (r = 0.04) and again, more fairly, on whether an advisory turns into a failure — and it did not hold any of the three times we tried it — on raw failure rates, on advisory-to-failure conversion, and again with deprivation measured properly inside each nation rather than England alone. We are closing it. What does predict local failure rates is the density of test centres, which is a statement about testing, not about cars.

All external-factor correlations (machine-readable)

Factor	r	n areas	Low-Q fail %	High-Q fail %	Gap pp	Low-Q factor	High-Q factor
Urban share (0–1)	-0.375	23	44.6	26.6	-17.9	0.7	1
Road-salt proxy (g/m²-yr)	0.183	23	40.4	45.5	+5.1	227	520
Frost days (days/year)	0.126	23	42.1	41.3	-0.8	12	29
Income deprivation (score)	0.106	21	34.3	42.3	+8.0	0.1	0.2
Terrain gradient (% grade)	0.051	13	37.1	38.4	+1.3	0.5	2
MOT centre density (per 10k vehicles)	0.039	23	31.4	31.2	-0.2	4.6	6.8
Distance to coast (km)	0.028	23	40.8	38.8	-2.0	12.3	79.9

Deprivation uses England IMD 2019 income score only (Scotland SIMD is a different scale). Salt proxy is a simplified NWSRG-style dry-salt sum from air Tmin; coastalness is distance from the area centroid to the nearest coastline.

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. Colour scale: 11%–55% failing.

LTI TX4 survival: which cars are still on the road

By age 18 is well below the reference at 0.8%, 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%.

By age 17, only about 8% as many cars of this family present for MOT as at ages 4–6 (reference n≈6,292); survivors still fail at 41.0% vs 31.8% at age 4. Older cars that still appear are a selected subset — weaker ones have already left.

How many miles does a LTI TX4 last?

100,000+ miles is highest at 85.5%; 200,000+ miles is lowest at 44.5% — the gap is 41.0 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Of 98,440 tests of this family with a usable odometer in 2024, 85.5% had reached 100k miles, 66.0% had reached 150k miles, 44.5% had reached 200k miles. This is a cross-section of cars still presenting for MOT, not a full birth cohort.

How many years is a LTI TX4 likely to last?

Bought at age 5 is highest at 9.8 years; Bought at age 15 is lowest at 1.2 years — the gap is 8.6 years.

bigger number = longer remaining lifeyears on the observed survival curve

estimateEstimate only — not a warranty: a typical 10-year-old example of this family has about 4.8 expected years of further MOT-present life on the 2024 survival curve. Derived from how many cars of each age still appear for test, not from a longitudinal panel.

LTI TX4 faults that come together

Road Wheels + Tyres stand out at 6.63×, against 1.00× if the faults were independent.

above 1.0× = more than expectedbelow 1.0× = less

Defects in «Body, chassis, structure» and «Brakes» appear together 4.19× more often than chance (1,737 co-occurrences in the same test; lift≥1.3, n≥500).

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 LTI TX4?

Cars driven under 5,000 miles a year stands out at 35.9%, against 32.0% for cars driven 8,000–12,000 miles a year.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

At matched ages 5–14, cars averaging under 5k miles/year fail at 35.9% vs 32.0% for 8–12k miles/year — 3.9 pp higher (n_low=1,156, n_normal=3,425). Low annual use is associated with more fails here — ‘hardly driven’ is not the same as ‘safer’. Diesel alone: 35.9% low-use vs 31.9% normal (+4.0 pp).

Best year for a LTI TX4, and the years to avoid

Build year 2014 is highest at 106.1; Build year 2016 is lowest at 91.7 — the gap is 14.4 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

build year vs the same model at the same age · 100 = as expected

The best build year here is 2016 and the weakest is 2014. Comparing build years sounds simple and is not: within a single year of testing, a car's build year and its age are the same number, so a naive comparison of years is a comparison of ages wearing a disguise. Each year below is measured against the same model at the same age in other cohorts, across six years of testing — 5 of 12 years come out distinguishable from their own model's age norm.

Two limits worth knowing before you act on this. Age, test year and build year are locked together by arithmetic, so the test-year effect is taken from the observed national failure level of each year rather than estimated — it is an adjustment, not a solution.

LTI TX4 MOT repair costs

The MOT-failure repair budget per test runs from £127.53 to £242.31, against £54.85 for the test itself.

bigger number = costs morepounds per test, MOT-failing faults only

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 £128 to £242, 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.

LTI TX4 running costs for a fleet

Vehicles failing at age 10 stand out at 40.0%, against 32.0% at age 7, tested in the same year.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

The number a fleet manager needs is not the failure rate, it is the year the car starts costing more. Between cars aged 9 and cars aged 10, both tested in 2024, the failure rate of this model is 3.34 percentage points higher — the steepest one-year step in this cross-section of different cars, and a natural planning point for replacement.

Repair spend uses the same modal prices as the section above, so it inherits the same limits: one typical repair per component group, not a full remedy. Downtime is the gap between the failed test and the passed re-test, which is the window a vehicle is legally off the road.

LTI TX4 rust problems: where they corrode

Age-standardised corrosion susceptibility stands out at 5.39×, against 1.00× for the national age-standardised rate.

above 1.0× = rusts more than averagebelow 1.0× = rusts less

This LTI TX4 fails on corrosion far more often than average once age is held constant, and its owners live in areas that are gentler than most for the models we publish. Those two point in opposite directions, which is the informative case: it rusts more than average despite living in gentler places, so the cause is the car, not the postcode.

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.

Does a LTI TX4 advisory become a failure?

Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment are highest at 28.1%; Non-component advisories are lowest at 0.0% — the gap is 28.1 percentage points.

higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability

chance the same component fails at the next MOT, given an advisory now

This is the question an advisory note actually raises, and it needs six years of test history to answer. We followed the same vehicles from one MOT to the next across 2019–2024 and measured how often a component that was merely advised came back as a genuine failure at the next test.

Read it as a budgeting horizon, not a prophecy: the most likely component above turns into a failure for about 28 in 100 cars, and the median gap is 6.2 months and roughly 9,749 miles. The rest were repaired, sold, scrapped, or simply held. Rows with fewer than 500 tracked advisories are not shown.

What will fail next on a LTI TX4?

Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment after a failure at age 15-19 are highest at 30.7%; Brakes after a passed at age <3 are lowest at 3.4% — the gap is 27.4 percentage points.

higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability

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.

LTI TX4 ownership: what six years of MOTs show

The ten-day re-test pass rate is highest at 55.4%; The later re-test pass rate is lowest at 2.4% — the gap is 53.0 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Failing is usually a same-week event, not a disaster. Of 24,828 failures followed through to their re-test, 42.26% were repaired and passed the same day and 55.38% within ten days; the median gap is 1 day. 93,497 defect items were cleared in the process.

Per mile driven, not per year. Dividing failures by the miles that actually went onto the odometers between consecutive tests gives 0.348 failures per 10,000 miles, on a median of 17,206 miles a year across 12,440 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. 67.16% of these cars strung together three or more tests with nothing recorded at all, while 32.4% 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: 5.167% of 12,482 chains show a reading lower than the previous test, with a median drop of 54,552 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.

LTI TX4 MOT: quick answers

LTI TX4 MOT Risk Index stands out at 120.7, 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 LTI TX4 first-time MOT pass rate?

62.34% of first attempts passed in 2024 (12,160 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 37.66% figure is the first-time initial failure rate, using 12,160 primary tests as the denominator (first-time, excluding retests). The age-adjusted MOT initial-failure ratio 120.7 is shown separately because raw rates compare fleet age as well as cars.

Compare the LTI TX4 with other cars

Ford Ranger is highest at 121.4; Nissan Juke is lowest at 120.3 — the gap is 1.1 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

Similar risk

Seat Ibiza (index 120.6)Nissan Juke (index 120.3)Ford Ranger (index 121.4)

Same size class

how Volkswagen Eos compareshow Ford Mustang compareshow Renault Modus compares

By build year

LTI TX4 2006LTI TX4 2007LTI TX4 2008LTI TX4 2009LTI TX4 2010LTI TX4 2011LTI TX4 2012LTI TX4 2013LTI TX4 2014LTI TX4 2015LTI TX4 2016LTI TX4 2017

By area

LTI TX4 MOT failure rate by postcode area

By failure group

LTI TX4 body, chassis and structure failuresLTI TX4 brakes failuresLTI TX4 vehicle identification failuresLTI TX4 lamps, reflectors and electrics failuresLTI TX4 noise, emissions and leaks failuresLTI TX4 road wheels failuresLTI TX4 seat belts and airbags failuresLTI TX4 steering failuresLTI TX4 suspension failuresLTI TX4 tyres failuresLTI TX4 visibility failures