Should I check the MOT history before buying a 2004 Yamaha Tdm900?

Yes. Look for recurring advisories — slow-building issues like corrosion or brake wear patterns show up years before they become failures. A full MOT history analysis will highlight patterns that a single test result won't reveal.

What corrosion should I look for when inspecting a 2004 Yamaha Tdm900?

Check brake pipes, sills, subframes, and chassis legs. Surface rust is normal at this age; structural rust is a serious problem that is expensive to fix and can fail an MOT.

How are tyres and brakes typically on a 2004 Yamaha Tdm900?

Tyres and brakes are the most common advisory items on vehicles of this age. Budget for replacement if they are near the limit, and factor this into your offer price.

Is the 2004 Yamaha Tdm900 reliable?

Based on MOT data from 321 vehicles, the 2004 Yamaha Tdm900 has a first-time MOT pass rate of 92%, indicating generally reliable for its class. Always check the full MOT history of any specific vehicle before buying.

What are common problems with the 2004 Yamaha Tdm900?

The most frequently recorded MOT issues on the 2004 Yamaha Tdm900 are: Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (70.6% of vehicles), Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (69.9% of vehicles), Drive chain slightly loose (41.4% of vehicles). These figures are based on actual MOT test records — search a specific registration on CarHunch to see its individual history.

Do I need an HPI check when buying a 2004 Yamaha Tdm900?

Yes. The MOT history will not show outstanding finance, insurance write-offs, or stolen status. An HPI check covers these areas and should be part of any used car purchase.

CarHunch

Get Started

Yamaha Tdm900 (2004)

321 real MOT outcomes analysed • 92% first-time pass rate

2004 Yamaha Tdm900

CarHunch analysed 321 real MOT records for the 2004 Yamaha Tdm900. Real test outcomes — pass rates, defect profiles, mileage data — from verified DVLA records. Updated as new MOTs are recorded.
Which year to buy? →

On this page

AI Analysis Reliability Overview Common Issues Check a Specific Reg Buyer's Checklist Mileage Distribution Still on the Road MOT Averages Colour Breakdown Compare Models

Moderate sample. 321 vehicles on record. Figures are indicative — the specific vehicle's history matters more than these averages.

The 2004 Yamaha TDM900 is genuinely reliable by MOT standards, with a 92% first-time pass rate that sits well above the UK average of 80%, and dangerous defects appearing in just 18.4% of the cohort—a manageable risk for a 20-year-old bike. The median mileage of 24,478 is relatively restrained for the age, suggesting these machines haven't been thrashed, and the low failure rate (1.23 per vehicle) backs up the picture of a fundamentally sound middleweight.

What you're buying is a bike that tends to need wear-and-tear attention—advisories averaged 6.2 per vehicle—but not structural or safety failures. Check the tyres, chain, and brake wear at inspection, and you'll likely be fine; this is a bike built to go the distance if maintained.

The 2004 Yamaha Tdm900 passes its MOT first time at roughly the UK average rate (92%) — solid but worth checking this vehicle's history carefully.

⚠️ Around 1 in 8 of these vehicles have had a dangerous MOT failure at some point — usually tyres or brakes, and often a one-off issue rather than a persistent problem. The group stats won't tell you which one you're looking at.

First-time pass

92%

UK average ~80%

Better than average

Dangerous (ever)

18.4%

At least once in MOT history

Check this vehicle

Avg failures / car

1.23

Over 13.9 tests on record

High

Typical mileage

24k

Middle half: 16k–35k

For context

✅ Good baseline reliability. A 92% first-time pass rate puts this well above the UK average — it's a well-sorted vehicle in this age bracket.

🔧 Expect consumable spend. An average of 6.2 advisories per vehicle tells you wear items (tyres, brakes) get flagged regularly. Budget for them — they're not surprises.

🔍 The dangerous defect figure is real. Most are one-off tyre failures or brake issues — not structural problems. But it's exactly why checking the individual vehicle's history is essential, not optional.

These stats describe 321 vehicles as a group. The specific vehicle you're looking at could be the one good example or the one outlier. Run its registration to find out.

Average reliability — agree?

What tends to go wrong

Across 321 vehicles — figures show how many had each issue flagged at least once in their MOT history.

Tyre wear 70.6%

Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit · Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit · Rear Tyre tread depth is below minimum requirements of 1.0mm · …

Budget for a full set — on a vehicle this age, tyres are expected consumables. An inspection will confirm how much is left.

Lighting 41.4%

Drive chain slightly loose

Usually cheap to fix. Worth confirming all lights work before collecting.

Brake wear 40.6%

Rear Brake pad(s) close to minimum limit · Rear Brake disc(s) slightly worn · Rear Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened · …

Ask the seller when brakes were last serviced. If they don't know, factor in the cost.

Exhaust & emissions 31.2%

Exhaust noisy

Other issues 11.6%

Drive chain worn but not considered excessive

Data covers a 3-year window centred on 2004.

See this vehicle's full MOT history & AI hunches

Spot recurring advisories, hidden issues, and how it compares to 321 Yamaha Tdm900 cars.

Before you buy a 2004 Yamaha Tdm900

Based on MOT data from 321 vehicles — here's what to check.

📋 Check the full MOT history. 18.4% of these vehicles have had a dangerous defect recorded - recurring advisories often signal problems years before they become failures.
Search the reg on CarHunch for the full MOT history, reliability stats and a free AI-powered analysis of that exact vehicle.
🔍 Brake pipes, sills and subframes are the key areas on a vehicle this age — structural rust is hard to spot without getting underneath. A mechanic will check all of this before you commit, and give you a concrete basis to negotiate on price. Inspection →
📄 Outstanding finance, insurance write-offs and clocking won't appear in the MOT records — a dedicated history check covers all of this. Our link gets you 20% off automatically. History Get 20% off via CarHunch

Colour Breakdown

Based on 1,826 Yamaha Tdm900 vehicles registered in the UK — across all years. From DVLA registration records.

Blue 39.3%

718

Silver 28.7%

524

Black 15.1%

276

Yellow 7.4%

135

Red 5%

Grey 3%

White 1.5%

Mileage Distribution

Most 2004 Yamaha Tdm900 vehicles sit in the blue band. If the vehicle you're looking at is outside it, it's either unusually low or high mileage for its age.

24,478

typical

15,854

low mileage

35,015

high mileage

Half of all 2004 Yamaha Tdm900 vehicles fall between 15,854 and 35,015 miles.

Is the mileage you're seeing normal?

✓ Under 15,854 miles — lower than most. Could be great, or could be a vehicle that rarely moved. Check test frequency and mileage progression in the MOT history.

✓ 15,854–35,015 miles — normal for age. This is where most 2004 Yamaha Tdm900s sit.

⚠ Over 47,270 miles — higher than typical. Not necessarily a problem, but check service history and look out for advisory build-up on tyres and brakes.

2004 Yamaha Tdm900 — Still on the Road

Numbers are thinning — 61% of 2004 Yamaha Tdm900s are still active.

146 vehicles still getting MOTs in 2025 — 61% of the peak remain.

Based on vehicles from this manufacture year that had at least one MOT test in each calendar year. Data from 2014–2025.
* The 2020 dip reflects the government's COVID-19 MOT exemption, which allowed certificates to be extended by six months — fewer tests were conducted that year.

MOT History Averages

13.9

Avg MOT tests per vehicle

1.23

Avg failures per vehicle

6.2

Avg advisories per vehicle

Other model years — Yamaha Tdm900: All Tdm900 years → Which year to buy? →

2002 2003 2005 2006 2007 2008

Or browse all models: Yamaha →

Compare with another model

See how the 2004 Yamaha Tdm900 stacks up against a rival.

Average reliability — agree?