MOT Risk Index.co.uk

Mitsubishi L200 2001: MOT failure rate for its age

45.8% of 4,595 MOT tests of the Mitsubishi L200 first registered in 2001 failed at the first attempt (2019–2024; retests excluded). Against this model's own normal rate at the same ages the index is 98.8 (95% CI 94.6–103.1; 100 = normal for this model at that age): the 2001 build year is no different from other years of the same model at the same age.

Mitsubishi L200 built in 2001 at a glance
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Failed first time45.8%all ages tested2019–20244595
Index against this model at the same age (95% CI 94.6–103.1)98.8index100 = normal for this model at that age2019–20244595
Rank among this model's 23 build years9of 231 = fails least for its age2019–20244595
Tested in 2024413testsmedian 128,132 miles2024413
line · Mitsubishi L200 built 2001 · first-time MOT failure share by age · built 2001 47.1% vs model normal 50.2% at age 18 · 2019–2024
Built 2001 against Mitsubishi L200 normal for the age: first-time MOT failure share at each age, age 18: 47.1% vs 50.2%; age 19: 47.3% vs 46.4%; age 20: 45.6% vs 45.1%; age 21: 43.1% vs 42.4%; age 22: 43.1% vs 43.3%. Axis from 0% to 60%. DVSA MOT bulk data, 2019–2024.

Data release dvsa-2024-v2 (24 Sep 2026) · page updated 30 Sep 2026 · full dataset (v5).

How does the 2001 Mitsubishi L200 fail at each age?

Cars built in 2001 were tested at ages 18 to 22 between 2019 and 2024. Each row compares their first-time failure share with what this model normally shows at that age, after allowing for the overall failure level of each test year.

Mitsubishi L200 built 2001: first-time MOT failure by age, against the model's normal rate at that age (2019–2024)
AgeTestsFailed, %95% intervalNormal for this model at that age, %Index (100 = normal)
181,39447.144.5–49.850.294
191,04247.344.3–50.346.4102.1
2090645.642.4–48.845.1101
2169143.139.5–46.842.4101.7
2256243.139–47.243.399.4

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 4,595 (initial tests) · Method: normal rate = this model's first-time failure share at that age across its build years (cells of 400+ tests), adjusted for each test year's overall level; cells of 30+ tests, under 500 marked rough · Updated: 30 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

What fails most on the 2001 Mitsubishi L200?

The most common failure group on cars built in 2001 is lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment: 60.4 items per 100 first tests, against 34.6 across all build years of the Mitsubishi L200. These counts are not age-adjusted: cars built in 2001 were tested at ages 18 to 22.

Failure items per 100 first tests, Mitsubishi L200 built 2001 against the Mitsubishi L200 in all build years (2019–2024, not age-adjusted)
Failure groupBuilt 2001, per 100All build years, per 100Items
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment60.434.63,024
Body, chassis, structure51.314.22,570
Suspension4522.72,255
Brakes31.420.51,572
Steering155.2751

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 5,008 (initial tests of this build year) · Method: failure items grouped by DVSA's top-level defect groups, per 100 initial tests; groups with 30+ items · Updated: 30 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

How does 2001 compare with the years around it?

Among the 23 published build years of the Mitsubishi L200, 2001 ranks 9 (1 = fails least for its age). 2000: index 99.7. 2002: index 102.5.

Mitsubishi L200 build years: index against the model at the same age (2019–2024)
Build yearIndex (100 = normal)95% intervalVerdictTests
1998112.098.5–125.5no different (rough estimate)509
199997.688.3–106.9no different (rough estimate)936
200099.793.4–105.9no different (rough estimate)2,089
200198.894.6–103.1no different4,595
2002102.599.5–105.5no different9,423
200399.897.6–101.9no different17,811
200497.996.1–99.8better22,575
200597.095.3–98.7better28,163
2006100.198.7–101.4no different42,640
200799.898.2–101.4no different32,922
2008103.7101.6–105.7worse20,700
2009105.0102.7–107.2worse18,304
2010101.199.2–102.9no different26,509
2011104.4102.6–106.3worse29,062
201299.196.8–101.4no different20,161
2013103.2100.9–105.4worse25,247
2014111.0108.7–113.2worse30,852
2015105.8103.8–107.8worse42,198
201686.784.7–88.7better42,199
201787.985.9–89.9better44,694
201898.595.9–101.0no different33,094
201998.095.0–100.9no different27,709
202098.693.4–103.7no different9,436

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 531,828 (initial tests) · Method: observed failures against those expected for the same model at the same ages, test-year level adjusted; verdict follows the printed one-decimal bound · Updated: 30 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

How to cite this page

MOT Risk Index (2026). Mitsubishi L200 2001 MOT statistics (data release dvsa-2024-v2; full dataset motriskindex-families-2024-v5, DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22975051), updated 30 September 2026. motriskindex.co.uk/cars/mitsubishi-l200/2001/

How every figure is calculated: methodology. Age, test year and build year are tied together (age = test year − build year), so the test-year level is taken as observed, not estimated.

Other pages for this model

Mitsubishi L200 1998 · Mitsubishi L200 1999 · Mitsubishi L200 2000 · Mitsubishi L200 2002 · Mitsubishi L200 2003 · Mitsubishi L200 2004 · Mitsubishi L200 2005 · Mitsubishi L200 2006 · Mitsubishi L200 2007 · Mitsubishi L200 2008 · Mitsubishi L200 2009 · Mitsubishi L200 2010 · Mitsubishi L200 2011 · Mitsubishi L200 2012 · Mitsubishi L200 2013 · Mitsubishi L200 2014 · Mitsubishi L200 2015 · Mitsubishi L200 2016 · Mitsubishi L200 2017 · Mitsubishi L200 2018 · Mitsubishi L200 2019 · Mitsubishi L200 2020 · Mitsubishi L200 by postcode area · Mitsubishi L200 body, chassis and structure failures · Mitsubishi L200 brakes failures · Mitsubishi L200 vehicle identification failures · Mitsubishi L200 lamps, reflectors and electrics failures · Mitsubishi L200 noise, emissions and leaks failures · Mitsubishi L200 road wheels failures · Mitsubishi L200 seat belts and airbags failures · Mitsubishi L200 steering failures · Mitsubishi L200 suspension failures · Mitsubishi L200 tyres failures · Mitsubishi L200 visibility failures