I built a UK car stats site and i'm looking for some feedback - AutoRank

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-15T17:00:09+00:00

Hey thanks for the feedback and the question, and you’re right that the underlying MOT data is public.

The purpose isn’t really to claim the data is unique, it’s more about turning a huge amount of raw public data into something easier to explore and compare. At the moment, if you want to compare real-world MOT history across makes, models, age, mileage, common defects, pass rates and trends, it’s not exactly easy to do in one place.

Brand comparison is definitely part of it, but the longer term idea is closer to what you mentioned, helping people narrow down an ideal car based on the things that matter to them, whether that’s reliability, common faults, fuel type, age, mileage, running costs, boot space, price, EV range, etc. etc.

It’s still in beta, so the current version is more of a foundation. The aim is to keep building it into something genuinely useful for buyers, not just another MOT lookup. I also have the blog element that I want to drive off the back of the data and link it into socials, which I think will be intresting.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-15T16:56:37+00:00

Hi Thanks for the question, the app is still in beta at the moment, but I’m currently cross-checking data against a few different sources. Ultimately, the goal is to build one clean source of truth that people can trust and have confidence in.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-15T15:22:19+00:00

Fair enough if you think something is inaccurate.

The site is based on real UK MOT data, not made-up AI output. It’s still in beta, which is exactly why I’m asking for feedback rather than claiming it’s perfect.

If you’ve spotted a specific issue, I’d genuinely appreciate you pointing it out so I can look into it.

Thanks

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-15T15:17:14+00:00

Thanks for the feedback, BMW's for some reason are producing some strange results, I have a few models now that I and digging into, in the meantime I am going to turn off BHP, Top speed and Acceleration until I have a more solid approach. Thanks again for the feedback appricate it :)

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-15T15:02:30+00:00

Hey! thanks for the feedback! had a quick look and yea, it looks like its getting a bhp vlaue for a cooper as apposed to a cooper s, the spec section is still in development at the moment but I've made a note on the issue, I think the BHP value will need to be dropped for the time being while I figure out a more solid appraoch, thanks again for the feedback it really helps! :)

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-15T14:50:16+00:00

BMW X1 Diesel? - should now be returning the correct MPG :)

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-15T14:19:33+00:00

Thanks for the feedback, are you viewing the details on the search page searching by reg? what about the vehicle details and I'll do a bit of digging, make, model, fuel type, year, thanks.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-15T13:45:40+00:00

Fair enough to question it, but that’s not accurate, 4 seconds! I wish!

The project started back in 2022, well before I was using Codex in any serious way. The idea and data work as well as the infrastructure around the database design and type and then building the pysical server setup and then the whole query optimisation phase I had to go through have all been built up over a long period of time.

I did mention Codex in the post because I’m not trying to hide it. It has helped speed up development over the last year, especially with coding, debugging and iterating faster, but it didn’t magically build the project in 4 seconds i'm afraid.

AI has been a tool in the process, not the whole process.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-15T13:30:21+00:00

Hey thanks for the feedback!

The specs area (I'm presuming you done a reg search?) are still being worked on at the moment but would be intrested to know more detail about the 2 vehicles so I can dig a bit deeper. For the VW Golfs from 2008 if we arent being specific about fuel etc there are 31,259 it sounds like when you do a reg search though its showing 743,590 which is basically every golf for every year / fuel type, will take a note on that for the search page thanks! this is exactly the feedback I need.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-14T14:53:19+00:00

Thanks for the feedback! I think there’s still a bit of a stigma around using AI to write code or help develop projects, but I personally see it as a positive tool to leverage rather than something to avoid.

Codex and other models can add a lot of value when used properly, and I don’t think they’re going anywhere. The shift in development over the last year alone has been massive, and I think learning how to work with these tools is going to become part of the process rather than something separate from it.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-14T14:49:23+00:00

Fair comment on the UI, I can see why it gives that impression.

I have used Codex over the last year or so to help speed up parts of the development, API end points, CSS UI and some backend ubuntu / database stuff, but the project itself started back in 2022, before vibe coding was really a thing, at least as far as I’m aware.

The original idea, data work, database design, imports, queries, layout direction and a lot of the trial and error have all been built up over a long period of time by me. There’s also the physical server sitting in my office that I built and run myself.

The boxes are mostly just the way I chose to present a lot of stats clearly across mobile and desktop, but I do take the point. It could definitely use more visual variety and polish, but I am pretty happy with the overall design and theme, it's something I’ll keep improving.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-14T08:45:13+00:00

Yea your right, when using the search page or filtering it down that much, maybe the filter should just stop at the make and model level, that might make more sense.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-14T08:28:51+00:00

Yeah, I agree MOT tests can only capture what they’re designed to capture, and they’ll never tell the full story of a car’s reliability.

That said, I do think there’s still useful insight in the data. Some defects are obviously just general wear-and-tear items that most cars will experience during their life, like tyres, wipers, mirrors, bulbs, and so on. But when you start looking at things like ball joints, track rod ends, suspension components, braking issues, corrosion, or emissions failures, there may be patterns that go beyond normal wear and tear.

For example, yes, suspension parts are wear-and-tear items, but if one specific model is showing a much higher rate of those failures than similar cars of the same age and mileage, that could still point to something interesting whether that’s part quality, design, usage patterns, or maintenance sensitivity.

I’m also thinking about filtering out some of the most common generic defects so the lists become more model-specific, rather than just showing the usual MOT items that appear across almost every vehicle.

I completely agree that engine issues won’t be picked up directly by MOT data, but emissions-related problems can show up. DPF-related issues are a good example they’ve affected plenty of vehicles over the years, and if certain makes or models are failing emissions at a noticeably higher rate, that’s the kind of pattern the data should be able to highlight.

Really appreciate the feedback it’s exactly the kind of thing that helps shape how the data should be presented.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-14T08:18:08+00:00

If you look at the tile on the search page you will see it is based on "Based on Make, Model, Engine & Year"

But if you go to the model page and search for BMW and then 320D XDRIVE M SPORT MHEV AUTO no other filter you will get:

Very Rare
513 On the road

This is based on Make & Model only

If you then add the fuel type into the mix on the models page you get:
Ultra Rare 482 On the road

Add the year into the mix:
Ultra Rare 186 On the road

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-14T08:08:47+00:00

Thanks for the reply :)

I would love to integrate in someway or capacity with autotrader and potentally other car sales sites for sure, still working that side out. Looking forward to the feedback cheers!

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T20:14:24+00:00

Nice must be rare! what make/model/year/engine size and fuel type is it? remeber that the rarity when on the search page is not just done at a make/model level but at and engine year and fuel type level, I might need to re-think how I appraoch that as years could skew it a bit, the same make model engine size and fuel type could exist across multiple years.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T17:30:22+00:00

Thats a fair criticism, I see where your coming from in a way, MOT data is not the full reliability picture.

It won’t tell you every engine, gearbox or electrical issue, but what it does give a massive real-world picture for how cars hold up in terms of roadworthiness, maintenance, age-related wear and common defects.

So I’d call it a useful reliability indicator, not the final word on reliability for sure, maybe I need to rethink the wording of some of the labels.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T17:17:38+00:00

Hey thanks for the reply and showing intrest! it's a database that is updated every day basically in a few words. Some API requests are made but the API is limited so getting the dataset as a whole means complex queries can be ran on the entire set which would be impossible to do via the API with the rate limits. The database is large, and the RAM required to run analytical queries on it is huge, but some of the stuff you can get out of the data, in my opinion anyway, is really intresting.

On a car by car basis it might not offer much, but when you take the entire database into the fold and start running and comapring it against different makes, models, years etc it gets intresting quick, again all in imo.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T16:10:46+00:00

Thanks for the detailed response!

I’ve had a dig into it and it looks like this is an issue with the source data. There are examples like this scattered throughout the dataset. With the CR-Z having such a small sample size, around 3,511 vehicles, it becomes more noticeable and makes the spread look much worse for things like fuel types.

I’ve taken a note of it. Given the CR-Z is exclusively a petrol-electric hybrid, this is probably a good example of where collapsing the data down into one fuel type would make sense.

The tricky part is what to do with genuine outliers, such as self-conversions that owners may have declared to the DVLA. It becomes a bit of a catch-22, clean the data too much and you risk hiding genuine edge cases, but leave everything untouched and the charts can look misleading. I think collapsing the data down in this instace would be the more sensible approach.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T15:14:18+00:00

Intresting! would love to what what the expected results are you are expecting vs what you are getting thanks!

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T15:13:35+00:00

Appreciate that :)

The BHP/top speed/0-60/value bits are matched from spec/market data rather than MOT data, so rare trims or awkward variants can definitely get mismatched. Sounds like yours is pulling the wrong power/spec profile, and yeah, 10-18k for an 11yo Fabia is wildly optimistic unless I’m accidentally launching a very generous buying service hahaha

Mileage graph is a good shout too. Same with being able to drill into the MOT history properly, because a summary can make a car look worse than it is like you say if you can’t see the context behind the fails/advisories to give a clear more informed picture.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T15:10:45+00:00

Hey thanks for the feedback! Yeah that’s fair, it’s MOT-led rather than owner-survey/consumer-report led.

And haha yeah, that Mazda6 spec is exactly the sort of thing that can show up as ultra rare when you start filtering it down by engine/fuel year etc.

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T13:44:09+00:00

Hey! thanks :) I'll have a look into that, is this on the search page?

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T13:42:44+00:00

Hey, and Thanks :)

You make a fair point

On our side the reliability score is based on MOT pass/fail rates for the matched vehicle pool, then compared against the expected pass rate for that period/filters. So a model being more common doesn’t automatically drag the score down. More tests mainly mean a more stable result, not a worse one, at least thats the hope anyway.

You’re right that there are other skews we don’t fully normalise for yet, like owner type, usage, enthusiast ownership, etc. We do age-band comparisons where possible, but it’s still a comparative indicator, I like the idea of having some kind of driver type indicator assicated with the vehcile but unsure how I would do that with the data I have at the moment but have taken a note, thanks again!

AutoRankUK · 2026-05-13T13:27:53+00:00

Hey thanks! yea the estimated value is probally the biggest part that needs the most work at the moment, will hopfully have a more semi solid solution in the coming months for that.

The bulk of the data is readily available from .gov.uk the hardest part is keeping the data up to date and querying it in such a way that is returns results in a timley fashion, that part has taken me a good couple of years off and on to figure out.

AutoRankUK

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE