Model Reports 5 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Land Rover Discovery 2001: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 64 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2001 Land Rover Discovery were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Anti-lock braking system (ABS).

Summary

The 2001 Land Rover Discovery follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 2,861 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
64 in every 100
Did not pass first time
36 in every 1001,023 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
24 yearsabout 153,586 miles
First tests counted
2,861

What failed most often

  1. Anti-lock braking system (ABS)14 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Chassis condition (rear)11 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Headlight aim11 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 2001 Land Rover Discovery 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 other suspension component ball joint dust cover (front): 11 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 1,017 of 1,023 failed first attempts (99.4%) that recorded an odometer reading in 2025. Mileage is needed to compare like with like.

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.

Other suspension component ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 29 first tests11 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A suspension joint dust cover that is missing, or no longer prevents the ingress of dirt, is graded Major. A dust cover that is severely deteriorated is graded Minor.

Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (rear)

Failed on 47 first tests8.2 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Excessive wear on an anti-roll bar linkage ball joint is Major. A joint likely to become detached is graded Dangerous.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 37 first tests, 5.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Suspension arm pins and bushes (rear)

Failed on 33 first tests4.9 times as often as similar carsLikely 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 44 first tests, 2.0 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.

Steering

One fault: steering drag link end (front), 7.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Steering drag link end (front)

Failed on 24 first tests7.4 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. Track rod or drag link ends that are seriously misaligned are Major. An unsafe modification to the steering linkage is Major, and Dangerous where the steering is affected.

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

Body and structure

Four faults. The strongest is the vehicle structure around towbar mounting (rear): 6.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Vehicle structure around towbar mounting (rear)

Failed on 25 first tests6.4 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Under the manual, towbar mounting points are not prescribed areas, so the vehicle structure near them is rejected only if its strength or continuity is significantly reduced. Corrosion, a fracture or excessive damage within a set distance of the mounting is graded Major. Structure so weakened that the towbar is likely to become detached is graded Dangerous.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 25 first tests, 26 times as often as on similar cars.

Fuel system

Failed on 26 first tests5.5 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A fuel tank with a hole, or a split filler neck, from which fuel can leak must be failed for leaking even if the hole or split is above the fuel line. A leaking fuel system is Major, and graded Dangerous where it leaks excessively or there is a risk of fire. Any defective part of an LPG, CNG, LNG or hydrogen system is also graded Dangerous.

Chassis condition (rear)

Failed on 116 first tests4.1 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A main load-bearing structural member that is fractured, deformed, modified or inadequately repaired is Major when structural rigidity is significantly reduced, and Dangerous where steering or braking is likely to be adversely affected. Corrosion of the body, cab or chassis at a mounting point is Dangerous where overall security or stability is impaired.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 109 first tests, 5.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Chassis condition (front)

Failed on 61 first tests3.3 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A main load-bearing structural member that is fractured, deformed, modified or inadequately repaired is Major when structural rigidity is significantly reduced, and Dangerous where steering or braking is likely to be adversely affected. Corrosion of the body, cab or chassis at a mounting point is Dangerous where overall security or stability is impaired.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 36 first tests, 2.8 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.

Brakes

Two faults and two wear patterns. The strongest is the electronic stability control: 6.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Electronic stability control

Failed on 48 first tests6.0 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

An ESC warning lamp is failed only when the tester is certain it indicates an ESC malfunction, because the lamp takes various forms and the owner's handbook may need checking. The system is also called ESP, VDC or DSC, among many other names. Every failure row is Major, covering the lamp, wheel speed sensors, wiring, other components and the switch.

Anti-lock braking system (ABS)

Failed on 146 first tests4.4 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

ABS is failed as removed only where it has obviously been removed, because not every vehicle in the age range where removal is not permitted has ABS. A warning lamp that does not light or shows an ABS fault is Major, as is a missing or excessively damaged wheel speed sensor. Every failure row for this component is Major.

Brake pads (rear)

Failed on 44 first tests2.3 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.

Brake discs (rear)

Failed on 25 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

A brake disc or drum must be significantly worn before it is rejected, and being worn below the manufacturer's recommended limits is not a reason in itself. Significantly and obviously worn is Major, as is contamination with oil or grease. A disc or drum that is fractured, insecure, seriously weakened or missing is graded Dangerous.

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

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.

Steering box play

Noted on 24 first tests8.7 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Other suspension component ball joint (front)

Noted on 23 first tests6.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Other power steering components

Noted on 24 first tests3.6 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Transmission oil leaks (front)

Noted on 57 first tests2.6 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
64in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
7in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
29in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 64.2% of 2,861 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 70.6%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 7 fixed and the 29 not fixed make the 36 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

406080100199520012005201020152020Older carsNewer cars
406080100200120102020Newer cars

Newer cars are younger, so look for a jump rather than the climb. A year earlier (2024), when these cars were a year younger, 61 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
199474 in every 100523
199569 in every 100671
199672 in every 100746
199770 in every 100864
199868 in every 100927
199966 in every 1001,637
200064 in every 1001,759
2001 This car64 in every 1002,861
200265 in every 1003,652
200366 in every 1004,666
200465 in every 1005,295
200564 in every 1006,295
200661 in every 1006,150
200763 in every 1005,278
200864 in every 1004,086
200966 in every 1004,486
201070 in every 1005,608
201171 in every 1005,453
201272 in every 1006,239
201374 in every 1005,951
201477 in every 1007,006
201579 in every 1008,703
201680 in every 1009,189
201782 in every 1009,170
201885 in every 1008,001
201986 in every 1007,476
202086 in every 1005,898
202186 in every 1006,395
202287 in every 1003,933

If you are buying one

What this year's MOT record means for the decision in front of you.

Mileage makes little difference on a 2001 Discovery.

Of 2001 Discovery vehicles with under 118,000 miles, 66 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 186,000 miles or more, 64 in every 100 did.

Under 118,000569 tests
66
118,000–143,000573 tests
64
143,000–163,000 Typical car549 tests
65
163,000–186,000583 tests
63
186,000 and over574 tests
64

What to check at your mileage

How often each fault turned up on a failed first test, by the car's mileage. Read it as: what is likely to need looking at on a car like the one in front of you.

Under 118,000143,000–163,000186,000 and over
Anti-lock braking system (ABS)6.25.34.4
Chassis condition (rear)3.54.04.5
Headlight aim3.94.24.0
Individual sidelight or tail light (front)1.94.45.7
Suspension mounting area (rear)3.02.94.4

Faults per 100 first tests, by the car's mileage at the test.

When a car fails

14in every 100

of failed cars had one item to fix.

68in every 100

of failed cars had three or more items to fix.

8in every 100

of all first tests had a defect the tester marked dangerous (unsafe to drive away).

Every figure here is a first-attempt MOT rate from DVSA open data for this model line, for cars of this model year tested in 2025. Each mileage band holds a fifth of the tests. MOTs do not test engine or gearbox internals, so this is a pre-purchase checklist, not a full reliability score.

FAQs

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

The 2001 Land Rover Discovery follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Anti-lock braking system (ABS), about 14 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 64.2% of 2,861 first MOTs on the 2001 Land Rover Discovery passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 70.6%. Among 1,023 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Other suspension component ball joint dust cover (front) appears more often than on similar cars (2.9% of those tests; 29 observed failures; about 11× 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 2001 Land Rover Discovery at the first attempt were Anti-lock braking system (ABS) (14.4%), Chassis condition (rear) (11.4%) and Headlight aim (10.9%), 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: Other suspension component ball joint dust cover (front) (2.9% of those tests; 29 observed failures; about 11× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Other suspension component ball joint dust cover (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (2.9% of those tests; 29 observed failures; about 11× 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 2001 Land Rover Discovery include Other suspension component ball joint dust cover (front), Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (rear), Steering drag link end (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 2001 Land Rover Discovery (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