Rover 216 — MOT statistics 2024

The Rover 216 failed 33.89% of 720 first MOT attempts in 2024 ("first-time", excluding retests). Adjusted for the age of the fleet, its initial-failure ratio is 99.2 (100 = expected for its age profile). This car is too close to call — statistically indistinguishable from normal for its age. Small sample — treat with care.

Age-adjusted peer: Alfa Romeo GT (index 99.2) — the two published results are 0.0 index points apart.

Rover 216 common problems: what actually fails the MOT

Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment are well below the reference at 21.4 per 100 tests, against 31.3 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.

Rover 216 MOT advisories: what gets flagged

Suspension is highest at 40.3 per 100 tests; Non-component advisories are lowest at 9.4 per 100 tests — the gap is 30.9 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.

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 5.5 percentage points. The failure most likely to come back is noise, emissions and leaks — 33.3% 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 5,670 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.

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.

Mileage changes little here (+3.6 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 Rover 216 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 Rover 216 perform as it gets older?

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

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

How dangerous are Rover 216 MOT failures?

Major defects stand out at 93.9 per 100 tests, against 52.8 per 100 tests nationally.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

Chart values: Minor 21.7 · Major 93.9 · Dangerous 8.6.

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

Does the month of a Rover 216 MOT matter?

Jan is highest at 41.1%; Apr is lowest at 34.0% — the gap is 7.1 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Chart scale: 27%–43%.

bars: Rover 216 · dashed: all class-4 cars

Takeaway: the spread between best and worst month is 7.1 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.

Rover 216 average mileage by age

Does high mileage mean more Rover 216 MOT failures?

All ages together, split by odometer (the bands are not split by age, so higher-mileage cars are also older and this mixes wear with age): 27.9% of the lowest-mileage cars failed versus 41.7% of the highest.

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

Where in Britain the Rover 216 fails its MOT most

Gloucester area is highest at 52.5%; Bournemouth area is lowest at 46.3% — the gap is 6.2 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

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.

How many miles does a Rover 216 last?

100,000+ miles stands out at 24.4%.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Of 6,370 tests of this family with a usable odometer in 2024, 24.4% had reached 100k miles. This is a cross-section of cars still presenting for MOT, not a full birth cohort.

Rover 216 faults that come together

Seatbelts & SRS + Suspension stand out at 4.07×, against 1.00× if the faults were independent.

above 1.0× = more than expectedbelow 1.0× = less

Defects in «Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems» and «Suspension» appear together 4.07× more often than chance (99 co-occurrences in the same test; 55 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).

Rover 216 MOT repair costs

The MOT-failure repair budget per test runs from £122.27 to £232.31, 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 £122 to £232, 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.

Rover 216 rust problems: where they corrode

Salt-belt exposure is well below the reference at 24th percentile, against 50th percentile as the middle of published models.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

This Rover 216 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.

Does a Rover 216 advisory become a failure?

Suspension is highest at 14.9%; Tyres are lowest at 6.5% — the gap is 8.4 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 15 in 100 cars, and the median gap is 12 months and roughly 1,449 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 Rover 216?

Body, chassis, structure after a failure at age 20+ are highest at 18.8%; Brakes after a passed at age 20+ are lowest at 7.0% — the gap is 11.7 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.

Rover 216 ownership: what six years of MOTs show

The ten-day re-test pass rate is highest at 68.4%; The later re-test pass rate is lowest at 7.8% — the gap is 60.6 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Failing is usually a same-week event, not a disaster. Of 1,560 failures followed through to their re-test, 23.85% were repaired and passed the same day and 68.4% within ten days; the median gap is 2 days. 4,585 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 1.879 failures per 10,000 miles, on a median of 836 miles a year across 1,425 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. 31.32% of these cars strung together three or more tests with nothing recorded at all, while 32.65% 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: 1.397% of 1,432 chains show a reading lower than the previous test, with a median drop of 2,003 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.

Rover 216 MOT: quick answers

Rover 216 MOT Risk Index is close to the reference at 99.2, 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 Rover 216 first-time MOT pass rate?

66.11% of first attempts passed in 2024 (720 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 33.89% figure is the first-time initial failure rate, using 720 primary tests as the denominator (first-time, excluding retests). The age-adjusted MOT initial-failure ratio 99.2 is shown separately because raw rates compare fleet age as well as cars.

Compare the Rover 216 with other cars

Volvo C70 is highest at 99.2; Kia Optima is lowest at 99.0 — the gap is 0.2 points.

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

Same brand

All Rover MOT statisticsRover 75 MOT statsRover Metro MOT stats

Similar risk

Alfa Romeo GT (index 99.2)Volvo C70 (index 99.2)Kia Optima (index 99.0)

Same size class

how Ferrari F355 compareshow Chrysler Jeep Wrangler compareshow Porsche 928 compares

By area

Rover 216 MOT failure rate by postcode area

By failure group

Rover 216 body, chassis and structure failuresRover 216 brakes failuresRover 216 vehicle identification failuresRover 216 lamps, reflectors and electrics failuresRover 216 noise, emissions and leaks failuresRover 216 seat belts and airbags failuresRover 216 steering failuresRover 216 suspension failuresRover 216 tyres failuresRover 216 visibility failures