Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Jaguar XK 2006: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 73 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2006 Jaguar XK were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (rear).

Summary

The 2006 Jaguar XK follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 1,636 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
73 in every 100
Did not pass first time
27 in every 100440 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
19 yearsabout 80,280 miles
First tests counted
1,636

What failed most often

  1. Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (rear)13 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (rear)12 in every 100 failed tests

How we count this. Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Only Class 4 cars on their first MOT of the year are counted. A car that fails and is fixed at the test station still counts as a fail in the first-attempt rate. These are raw results, not adjusted for age, mileage, or peer mix. The MOT does not test engine or gearbox internals.

Note:

These are patterns across 2006 Jaguar XK vehicles in 2025, not a prediction that any one car will have them. Faults are grouped by part of the car. A wear pattern follows age and use more than the way the car was built. They come from MOT defect codes, not manufacturer bulletins, recalls or a diagnosis of any one car.

Suspension

Three faults. The strongest is the anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (rear): 93 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 440 failed first attempts in 2025 that had a mileage recorded, which allows a like-for-like comparison.

We only list faults with at least 20 failures and a rate of about 2.0 times that of similar cars, which keeps one-off results out of the list.

Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (rear)

Failed on 54 first tests93 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A suspension joint dust cover that is severely deteriorated is Minor. It becomes Major once it is missing or no longer prevents the ingress of dirt, so what matters is whether it still keeps dirt out. DVSA words this for any suspension joint dust cover, and files it here under anti-roll bars.

Suspension arm pins and bushes (rear)

Failed on 24 first tests7.5 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Pins and bushes on suspension arms fail as Major when they are excessively worn. They are graded Dangerous when likely to become detached. DVSA uses the same wording for a suspension joint.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 49 first tests, 6.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 31 first tests3.1 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Whether a suspension arm ball joint dust cover still keeps dirt out decides its grade. Severely deteriorated is Minor, while missing, or no longer preventing the ingress of dirt, is Major.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage. Advisories count notes recorded on failed first tests only.

Steering

One fault: track rod end (front), 3.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Track rod end (front)

Failed on 46 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A steering ball joint with excessive wear or free play is Major, and one worn to the extent there is a serious risk of detachment is graded Dangerous. A dust cover that is damaged but still keeps dirt out is Minor, and one missing or no longer keeping dirt out is Major. Testers must tell wear from a joint's built-in clearance or spring loading.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage.

Brakes

One wear pattern: brake pads (rear), 2.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake pads (rear)

Failed on 21 first tests2.5 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

A pad worn down to its wear indicator, or contaminated with oil or grease, is Major. A pad worn below the set thickness limit, missing or incorrectly mounted is Dangerous. The manual treats an illuminated brake wear indicator as no reason for failure, although DVSA also lists an illuminated indicator as a Major row.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 28 first tests, 2.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage. Advisories count notes recorded on failed first tests only.

Advisories

Other things testers noted as worn or close to failing, more often than on similar cars.

An advisory is a note from the tester about something that has not failed yet. It is an early warning, not a fail. Advisories for the faults above are shown with those faults.

Wheel condition (front)

Noted on 27 first tests4.2 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension sub-frame (rear)

Noted on 68 first tests2.8 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Counts cover advisories recorded on failed first tests only, compared with cars of the same age and mileage.

MOT pass rates

How first tests ended, and how the pass rates are counted.

Passed first time
73in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
4in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
23in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 73.1% of 1,636 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 76.7%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 4 fixed and the 23 not fixed make the 27 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

Passed first time in every 100, all tested in 2025.

406080100200620072008200920102011201220132014Newer cars
40608010020062010Newer cars

Newer cars are younger, so look for a jump rather than the climb.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
2006 This car73 in every 1001,636
200774 in every 100986
200874 in every 100656
200976 in every 100549
201082 in every 100565
201182 in every 100537
201285 in every 100522
201388 in every 100797
201490 in every 1001,100

FAQs

Short answers about how to read this model-year guide.

The 2006 Jaguar XK follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (rear), about 13 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 73.1% of 1,636 first MOTs on the 2006 Jaguar XK passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 76.7%. Among 440 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (rear) appears more often than on similar cars (12.3% of those tests; 54 observed failures; about 93× more often than similar cars). There is no single reliability score here; this is a pre-purchase checklist built from DVSA open data, not a guarantee for any individual car.
Ranked by how often they were actually recorded, the items that most often failed a 2006 Jaguar XK at the first attempt were Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (rear) (12.5%) and Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (rear) (12.3%), each as a share of the year's failed first attempts. That is what goes wrong most often on the car. The common faults table shows a different measure: faults that are unusual compared with similar cars.
Among failed first-attempt tests we highlight patterns that appear more often than on similar cars. Top example: Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (rear) (12.3% of those tests; 54 observed failures; about 93× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (12.3% of those tests; 54 observed failures; about 93× more often than similar cars). That does not prove a design fault. Age, mileage, and how the car was used still matter. Treat it as a pre-purchase checkpoint, not a manufacturer service bulletin.
Common MOT problem areas for the 2006 Jaguar XK include Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (rear), Suspension arm pins and bushes (rear), Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front). These are the faults that stand out compared with similar cars, not a complete list of what can go wrong on any individual car.
Advisories flag issues noted at the test and are not a fail rate. We show advisory patterns that appear more often than on similar cars 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 MOT failure patterns for the 2006 Jaguar XK (registration year) using UK DVSA open data for the selected test year. Patterns are compared with cars of a similar age and mileage. It is a buyer checklist from MOT defect statistics, not a full service history or manufacturer service-bulletin 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.

About this data

How this page is built and what it can (and can't) say.

These figures come from UK MOT open data for this model year. We surface common failure patterns against similar cars, not a full reliability score, and not a pass/fail verdict on any individual vehicle.

2024 2025

What we include

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

Same-day repairs

PRS means the car 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.

How we compare

We compare this model year with other Class 4 cars of similar age and mileage in the same test year. This model family is left out of the peer group so the car is not measured against itself.

What this does not cover

  • MOTs do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronics; this is not a full reliability score.
  • Common faults come from MOT defect stats, not manufacturer TSBs or recalls.
  • Age and mileage matching reduces, but does not remove, differences in how cars were used and maintained.
  • If the data for a car is too thin to say anything useful, we say so rather than guess.

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

Check any vehicle’s MOT history

Full MOT history, mileage records, and reliability insights for any UK vehicle.

Run a free check