Model Reports 8 min read Updated 12 Jul 2026

Renault Kangoo 2017: reliability & common MOT faults

Elevated MOT failure patterns for the 2017 Renault Kangoo include Rigid brake pipes (~16.1× peers) and Drive shafts — Joints (~7.7× peers). Based on UK DVSA open data for test year 2025 (964 failed first-attempt tests), compared with similar age and mileage peers. Available test years: 2024, 2025.

964 failed first-attempt tests · 2,258 first tests (test year 2025)

Standout pattern: Rigid brake pipes — about 16.1× more often than on similar peer cars.

Key takeaways before you buy

  • Rigid brake pipes: about 16.1× more often than similar cars
  • Drive shafts — Joints: about 7.7× more often than similar cars
  • Rigid brake pipes (rear): about 6.7× more often than similar cars

Common faults

These are MOT failure patterns that show up more often on this registration year than on similar cars of the same class, age band, and mileage in the same test year (leave-one-out peer comparison; whole model family excluded).

Statistical patterns from MOT defect codes — not manufacturer TSBs, recalls, or a diagnosis of any individual car. Fail and advisory patterns are kept separate.

Based on 964 failed first-attempt tests in test year 2025.

Rigid brake pipes

This failure pattern appears about 16.1× more often than on similar peer cars — recorded on 24 failed first-attempt tests; 2.5% of failed tests for this model year.

Any · 24 failures · ×16.1 vs similar cars · 2.5% of failed first tests · Possible elevated fault

Drive shafts — Joints

This failure pattern appears about 7.7× more often than on similar peer cars — recorded on 28 failed first-attempt tests; 2.9% of failed tests for this model year.

Any · 28 failures · ×7.7 vs similar cars · 2.9% of failed first tests · Possible elevated fault

No patterns met the strongest callout thresholds on this page; showing the highest-lift rows that still cleared the display floors.

# Fault pattern Location Failures vs similar cars Share of fails Confidence
1 Rigid brake pipes
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Any 24 ×16.1 2.5% Possible elevated fault
2 Drive shafts — Joints
Body, chassis, structure > Transmission > Drive shafts > Joints
 Any 28 ×7.7 2.9% Possible elevated fault
3 Rigid brake pipes (rear)
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Rear 38 ×6.7 3.9% Likely common fault pattern
4 Rigid brake pipes (front)
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Front 25 ×5.0 2.6% Possible elevated fault
5 Position lamp (front)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Position lamps > Position lamp
 Front 155 ×4.1 16.1% Likely common fault pattern
6 Drive shafts — Joints (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Transmission > Drive shafts > Joints
 Front 162 ×4.0 16.8% Likely common fault pattern
7 Stop lamp
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Stop lamp
 Any 110 ×3.6 11.4% Likely common fault pattern
8 Registration plate lamp(s)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Registration plate lamp(s)
 Any 111 ×3.5 11.5% Likely common fault pattern
9 Stop lamp (rear)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Stop lamp
 Rear 92 ×3.2 9.5% Likely common fault pattern
10 Coil spring (rear)
Suspension > Springs > Coil springs > Coil spring
 Rear 134 ×3.1 13.9% Likely common fault pattern

Only patterns that clear minimum sample and elevation thresholds are shown (at least 20 failures and 2.0× peer lift).

Advisories

Advisory items recorded on failed first-attempt tests that appear elevated versus peers. Advisories are not a fail rate — they flag issues noted at the test, often before they become failures.

# Advisory pattern Location Notes vs similar cars Share Confidence
1 Pedal
Brakes > Service brake pedal or hand lever > Pedal
 Any 40 ×14.0 4.1% Elevated vs peers
2 Stop lamp
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Stop lamp
 Any 37 ×10.5 3.8% Likely common fault pattern
3 Stop lamp (rear)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Stop lamp
 Rear 20 ×10.3 2.1% Likely common fault pattern
4 Rigid brake pipes
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Any 42 ×8.0 4.4% Possible elevated fault
5 Rigid brake pipes (rear)
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Rear 91 ×5.8 9.4% Likely common fault pattern
6 Road Wheels — Condition (front)
Road Wheels > Condition
 Front 28 ×3.4 2.9% Elevated vs peers
7 Track rod end (front)
Steering > Steering linkage components > Track rod end
 Front 28 ×3.1 2.9% Possible elevated fault

FAQs

We do not show a single reliability score for the 2017 Renault Kangoo on this page. Among 964 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Rigid brake pipes appears more often than on similar peer cars (about 16.1× more often than peers; 24 observed failures; 2.5% of failed tests). Treat this as a pre-purchase checklist from DVSA open data — not a guarantee for any individual car.
Among failed first-attempt tests we surface patterns that appear more often than on similar peer cars. Top example: Rigid brake pipes (about 16.1× more often than peers; 24 observed failures; 2.5% of failed tests). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Rigid brake pipes shows up more often than on similar peer cars (about 16.1× more often than peers; 24 observed failures; 2.5% of failed tests). That does not prove a causal design fault — age, mileage, and usage still matter. Treat it as a pre-purchase check point, not a manufacturer TSB.
Common MOT problem areas for the 2017 Renault Kangoo include Rigid brake pipes, Drive shafts — Joints, Rigid brake pipes (rear). These are elevated versus similar peer cars where lift clears our floors — not a full list of every possible fault on an individual car.
Advisories flag issues noted at the test and are not a fail rate. We show advisory patterns that look elevated versus peers among failed first-attempt tests, separate from common failure rows. Use them as early-warning checks, not as a pass/fail score.
This page highlights elevated MOT failure patterns for the 2017 Renault Kangoo (registration year) using UK DVSA open data for the selected test year. Patterns are ranked against similar age and mileage peers. It is a buyer checklist from MOT defect statistics — not a full service history or manufacturer TSB list.
No. MOT tests do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronic modules. Patterns here come from MOT defect statistics only and should not be read as engine or gearbox reliability scores.
PRS means the vehicle failed items that were fixed at the test station and then passed the same day. We count PRS as a first-attempt fail in headline rates so same-day repairs do not hide problems.

About this data

Universe. UK class 4 cars only; normal MOT tests (not retests); results pass, PRS, or fail; one first test per vehicle per calendar year.

PRS policy. PRS means the vehicle failed items that were fixed at the test station and then passed the same day. We count PRS as a first-attempt fail in headline rates so same-day repairs do not hide problems.

Peer baseline. We compare this model year with other class 4 cars of similar age and mileage in the same test year, excluding the whole model family so the car is not compared with itself (leave-one-out peer baseline).

Data years. Test years covered: 2024, 2025.

Limitations.

  • MOT tests do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronic modules — so this is not a full reliability score.
  • Common faults are inferred from MOT defect statistics, not manufacturer TSBs or recalls.
  • Matching on age and mileage reduces but does not remove every usage or maintenance difference between cars.
  • Pass rates and star scores appear only when those data marts are available; this page never invents them.

Display rules config: 1

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Most reliable Renault models

See brand-wide MOT rankings and year guidance for Renault (separate from this model-year report).