MOT Risk Index.co.uk

Nissan Silvia — MOT statistics 2024

The Nissan Silvia failed 17.06% of 504 first MOT attempts in 2024 ("first-time", excluding retests). Adjusted for the age of the fleet, its initial-failure ratio is 51.6 (100 = expected for its age profile). This car fails its MOT about 48% less often than expected for its age. Small sample — treat with care.

MOT risk index 51.6, 95% CI 42.4–62.2 (100 = national average) 100 51.6 0 200
Index
51.6
100 = age-normal
Raw fail rate
17.06%
n = 504
Dangerous /100
5
national ≈11
Rank
109 of 761
lower index = better

Age-adjusted peer: Bentley Turbo (index 51.6) — the two published results are 0.0 index points apart.

Nissan Silvia common problems: what actually fails the MOT

Suspension is well below the reference at 8.0 per 100 tests, against 20.8 per 100 tests across UK vehicles of the same ages.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

Nissan Silvia common problems: what actually fails the MOT — 2024 UK MOT data

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.

GroupThis familyCases behind itUK, same agesFamily / national
Lamps & electrical21.160926.60.79×0.73–0.86
Emissions & leaks9.62786.91.39×1.24–1.57
Suspension8.023020.80.38×0.33–0.43
Brakes6.518917.90.36×0.32–0.42
Steering6.41855.31.20×1.03–1.39
Visibility5.315210.30.51×0.43–0.60
Named defects — items per 100 initial tests, this family vs UK national average; this model measured on 2,890 tests, 2019-2024, national column 2024
What failedper 100 tests (this family)per 100 tests (UK average)ratio family / UKWhat to check
Emissions levels exceed default limitsEmissions levels exceed default limits3.880.478.33×Watch for smoke on a cold start — emissions failures are costly
Steering rack gaiter or ball joint dust cover…Steering rack gaiter or ball joint dust cover damaged or deteriorated3.700.764.88×Ask the seller about: Steering rack gaiter or ball joint dust cover damaged or det
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 functioning2.770.436.50×Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure
Lambda coefficient outside the default limits or…Lambda coefficient outside the default limits or the range specified by the manufacturer2.460.534.65×Ask the seller about: Lambda coefficient outside the default limits or the range s
Windscreen washers not working or not providing…Windscreen washers not working or not providing sufficient fluid to clear the windscreen2.011.621.24×Check wipers, washers and windscreen chips in the driver's view
Aim of a headlamp is not within limits laid down…The aim of a headlamp is not within limits laid down in the requirements2.872.571.12×Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure
Suspension joint dust cover severely deterioratedA suspension joint dust cover severely deteriorated1.971.901.04×Listen for knocks over bumps — worn joints show up on the test

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

Nissan Silvia MOT advisories: what gets flagged

Tyres are highest at 23.9 per 100 tests; Non-component advisories are lowest at 4.4 per 100 tests — the gap is 19.5 per 100 tests.

higher bar = flagged more oftenadvisory items per 100 initial tests

Nissan Silvia MOT advisories: what gets flagged — 2024 UK MOT data
Advisory rates table
GroupAdvisories per 100
Tyres23.9
Suspension19.7
Brakes16.5
Body & structure11.2
Emissions & leaks6.2
Non-component advisories4.4

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 testFails next yearVehicles followed
It failed18.1%155
It passed13.7%1,127

A failed test does not clearly change next year's odds here (18.1% against 13.7%): the difference is within the margin of error. The failure most likely to come back is lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment — 21.4% 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 2,774 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 forIndexReading
Age only57.8fails less often than expected
Age and annual mileage54.3fails less often than vehicles driven as much
Share doing under 3,000 miles a year17.1%a normal spread of use

Mileage changes little here (-3.5 points): this fleet is driven about as much as the vehicles it is compared with. 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 Nissan Silvia 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.

AgeNissan SilviaSame class, same ageDifferenceTests
20 years20.59%42.44%-21.85 pp238

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 Nissan Silvia perform as it gets older?

The Silvia at age 20 is well below the reference at 19.0%, against 41.0% for all vehicles of the same age.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

How does the Nissan Silvia perform as it gets older? — 2024 UK MOT data

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

Takeaway: solid line: this family; dashed: all cars.

Data table
AgeNissan SilviaAll vehiclesGap
2019.0%41.0%-22.1 pp

How dangerous are Nissan Silvia MOT failures?

Dangerous defects are well below the reference at 5.3 per 100 tests, against 11.2 per 100 tests nationally.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

How dangerous are Nissan Silvia MOT failures? — 2024 UK MOT data
Severity table
SeverityThis family /100National /100Family / national
Minor13.2514.220.93×
Major48.2752.750.92×
Dangerous5.2611.150.47×

Chart values: Minor 13.3 · Major 48.3 · Dangerous 5.3.

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

Does the month of a Nissan Silvia MOT matter?

Feb is highest at 23.7%; Jan is lowest at 15.7% — the gap is 7.9 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Does the month of a Nissan Silvia MOT matter? — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart scale: 14%–33%.

bars: Nissan Silvia · dashed: all class-4 cars

Month-by-month table
MonthNissan SilviaAll vehiclesGap
Jan15.74%31.12%-15.4 pp
Feb23.66%29.99%-6.3 pp
Mar20.13%28.26%-8.1 pp
Apr18.41%29.78%-11.4 pp
May19.81%28.79%-9.0 pp
Jun22.38%28.15%-5.8 pp
Jul18.3%29.33%-11.0 pp
Aug19.16%29.2%-10.0 pp
Sep16.47%28.19%-11.7 pp
Oct19.74%30.34%-10.6 pp
Nov21.13%30.58%-9.4 pp
Dec18.85%29.33%-10.5 pp

Takeaway: the spread between best and worst month is 7.9 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.

Nissan Silvia average mileage by age

At age 20+, the middle half of Silvias runs from 66,095 miles to 109,719 miles, against 86,682 miles as the median.

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

Does high mileage mean more Nissan Silvia MOT failures at the same age?

Within the same age group, split by odometer (2024 MOTs), so this separates wear from age: at ages 15+, 21.2% of those with 40,000–70,000 miles failed first time versus 22.2% of those with 100,000–140,000 miles.No clear mileage gap inside this age group, among cars still being tested.

Does high mileage mean more Nissan Silvia MOT failures at the same age? — 2024 UK MOT data
Nissan Silvia: first-time failure by mileage within each age group (2024)
AgeOdometer% failing95% intervalTests
15+40-70k miles21.2%12.2–34%52 (rough estimate)
15+70-100k miles10.3%5.5–18.5%87 (rough estimate)
15+100-140k miles22.2%13.7–33.9%63 (rough estimate)

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

Mileage by age (p25 / median / p75)
Agep25Medianp75Tests
20+66,09586,682109,719216

A typical 20+-year-old Silvia has ~86,682 miles on the clock. Much more — ask why; much less — check for gaps in the MOT history.

Where in Britain the Nissan Silvia fails its MOT most

Too few tests in any single postcode area to name one, so this is the wider picture across 2,890 tests, 2019-2024.

Part of Britain% failingTests
Southern England20.97%1,364
Northern England18.87%371
Midlands17.99%906
Scotland17.13%181

Raw pass/fail rates, not age-adjusted: fleets differ by region. England is split north of Sheffield, between Sheffield and Oxford, and south of it.

Nissan Silvia survival: which cars are still on the road

By age 19 is close to the reference at 100.0%, against 100.0% at the ages 4–6 reference level.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Nissan Silvia line: median · band: middle half of the fleet (p25–p75) — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart axes: car age, years · survival vs ages 4–6 · scale 0–105%.

Survival vs fail rate by age
AgeTestsSurvival vs ages 4–6Fail %
37566.4%14.67%
48978.8%20.22%
5122100%16.39%
6128100%11.72%
711097.3%19.09%
89180.5%10.99%
95649.6%19.64%
176053.1%20%
1810391.2%18.45%
19146100%15.75%

By age 19, at least as many cars of this family present for MOT as at ages 4–6 (reference n≈113): the older fleet has not thinned out here, so there is no survivor selection to allow for.

How many miles does a Nissan Silvia last?

100,000+ miles stands out at 51.3%.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

OdometerTests ≥ thresholdShare of sample
100,000+ miles1,46351.3%

Of 2,852 tests of this family with a usable odometer in 2024, 51.3% had reached 100k miles. This is a cross-section of cars still presenting for MOT, not a full birth cohort.

How many years is a Nissan Silvia likely to last?

Bought at age 5 is highest at 9.8 years; Bought at age 8 is lowest at 8.6 years — the gap is 1.2 years.

bigger number = longer remaining lifeyears on the observed survival curve

Age nowTypical mileage (p50)Expected years left
5—at least 9.8
8—at least 8.6

estimateObserved only until age 19. The curve does not run five years past the stated age with the share still tested under 50%, so no 'years left' number is given.

Nissan Silvia faults that come together

Body & structure + Brakes stand out at 7.41×, against 1.00× if the faults were independent.

above 1.0× = more than expectedbelow 1.0× = less

Group AGroup BTogetherLift
Body, chassis, structureBrakes207.41× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems257.18× (rough estimate)
SuspensionTyres206.9× (rough estimate)
BrakesSuspension366.48× (rough estimate)
BrakesLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment645.53× (rough estimate)
BrakesVisibility275.52× (rough estimate)
SteeringSuspension335.33× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentVisibility634.92× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment344.81× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentNoise, emissions and leaks684.52× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSuspension634.33× (rough estimate)
SuspensionVisibility264.23× (rough estimate)
BrakesNoise, emissions and leaks244.18× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentTyres254.14× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksVisibility243.77× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksSuspension263.6× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSteering423.25× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureNoise, emissions and leaks18too few (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureSteering16too few (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureSuspension16too few (rough estimate)
SteeringVisibility16too few (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksSteering16too few (rough estimate)
BrakesTyres15too few (rough estimate)
BrakesSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems14too few (rough estimate)
BrakesSteering14too few (rough estimate)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsVisibility12too few (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems12too few (rough estimate)
SteeringTyres12too few (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureVisibility12too few (rough estimate)
TyresVisibility11too few (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment10too few (rough estimate)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsSuspension10too few (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksTyres10too few (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureTyres9too few (rough estimate)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsTyres7too few (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems7too few (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleNoise, emissions and leaks6too few (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems5too few (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentRoad Wheels5too few (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleVisibility5too few (rough estimate)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsSteering5too few (rough estimate)

Defects in «Body, chassis, structure» and «Brakes» appear together 7.41× more often than chance (20 co-occurrences in the same test; 78 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).

Nissan Silvia MOT repair costs

The MOT-failure repair budget per test runs from £72.89 to £138.49, against £54.85 for the test itself.

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

MOT repairs, budget
£73–138
per test, repairs only
The test itself
£54.85
statutory cap, unchanged since 2010
How the figure is built: chance of failing × typical price of that repair
ComponentFails per 100 testsTypical repairIts priceContribution
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment21.1 (nat. 18.09)Battery replacement (standard 12V lead-acid)£140£29.54
Noise, emissions and leaks9.6 (nat. 3.67)Exhaust rear silencer£200£19.20
Suspension8.0 (nat. 15.36)Suspension coil spring (single corner)£180£14.40
Brakes6.5 (nat. 11.25)Front brake pads (parts + labour, typical hatchback)£150£9.75

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 £73 to £138, 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.

Nissan Silvia rust problems: where they corrode

Salt-belt exposure is well below the reference at 33rd percentile, against 50th percentile as the middle of published models.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

How it rusts
—
not enough tests to publish
Salt Belt exposure
33rd
percentile among the models published here, from its tests across 0 postcode areas

This Nissan Silvia has too few tests to judge for corrosion once age is held constant, and its owners live in areas that are about typical 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 Nissan Silvia?

Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment after a failure at age 20+ are highest at 17.0%; Steering after a passed at age 3-5 is lowest at 3.8% — the gap is 13.2 percentage points.

higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability

Probability of each component failing at the next test, by age and last result
AgeLast testMost likely next failuresCars tracked
<3passedLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 14.8%54 (rough estimate)
3-5passedSteering 3.8%132 (rough estimate)
3-5advisoryLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 12.3% · Noise, emissions and leaks 8.8%57 (rough estimate)
15-19passedLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 6.9% · Noise, emissions and leaks 5.3% · Suspension 4.2%189 (rough estimate)
15-19advisoryLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 11.5% · Steering 9.2% · Suspension 5.8%87 (rough estimate)
15-19failureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 14.7% · Brakes 7.3% · Noise, emissions and leaks 7.3%68 (rough estimate)
20+passedLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 7.5% · Suspension 4.8% · Noise, emissions and leaks 4.0%523
20+advisoryLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 12.7% · Steering 7.3% · Brakes 4.9%205 (rough estimate)
20+failureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 17.0% · Suspension 8.1% · Steering 7.6%223 (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.

Nissan Silvia ownership: what six years of MOTs show

Clean three-test streak is highest at 48.9%; Repeated the same advisory is lowest at 13.9% — the gap is 35.0 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Fails /10k miles
0.527
miles actually driven
Clean streaks
48.92%
3+ tests, nothing noted
Odometer anomaly
39.65%
reading went backwards

Per mile driven, not per year. Dividing failures by the miles that actually went onto the odometers between consecutive tests gives 0.527 failures per 10,000 miles, on a median of 1,142 miles a year across 642 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. 48.92% of these cars strung together three or more tests with nothing recorded at all, while 13.89% 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: 39.65% of 686 chains show a reading lower than the previous test, with a median drop of 49,527 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.

Nissan Silvia MOT: quick answers

Nissan Silvia MOT Risk Index is well below the reference at 51.6, 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 Nissan Silvia first-time MOT pass rate?
82.94% of first attempts passed in 2024 (504 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 17.06% figure is the first-time initial failure rate, using 504 primary tests as the denominator (first-time, excluding retests). The age-adjusted MOT initial-failure ratio 51.6 is shown separately because raw rates compare fleet age as well as cars.

Compare the Nissan Silvia with other cars

Morris Minor is highest at 51.6; Ford Capri is lowest at 51.5 — the gap is 0.1 points.

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

Same brand

All Nissan MOT statisticsNissan 300ZX MOT statsNissan 200 MOT stats

Similar risk

Bentley Turbo (index 51.6)Morris Minor (index 51.6)Ford Capri (index 51.5)

Same size class

how Nissan 300ZX compareshow Chevrolet Camaro compareshow Honda Freed compares

By failure group

Nissan Silvia body, chassis and structure failuresNissan Silvia brakes failuresNissan Silvia lamps, reflectors and electrics failuresNissan Silvia noise, emissions and leaks failuresNissan Silvia seat belts and airbags failuresNissan Silvia steering failuresNissan Silvia suspension failuresNissan Silvia tyres failuresNissan Silvia visibility failures


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:nissan-silvia:dvsa-2024-v2. Full method: methodology.

Cite: MOT Risk Index (2026). Nissan Silvia MOT statistics 2024 (data release dvsa-2024-v2; downloadable dataset motriskindex-families-2024-v5, doi:10.5281/zenodo.22975051). https://motriskindex.co.uk/cars/nissan-silvia/ · Published 2026-07-30.