Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Toyota Land Cruiser 2006: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 62 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2006 Toyota Land Cruiser were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Drive shaft joints and boots (front).

Summary

The 2006 Toyota Land Cruiser follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 1,051 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
62 in every 100
Did not pass first time
38 in every 100401 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
19 yearsabout 146,242 miles
First tests counted
1,051

What failed most often

  1. Drive shaft joints and boots (front)16 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)16 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 Toyota Land Cruiser 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.

Body and structure

Two faults. The strongest is the chassis condition (rear): 5.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 400 of 401 failed first attempts (99.8%) 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.

Chassis condition (rear)

Failed on 33 first tests5.2 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 29 first tests, 4.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Exhaust system

Failed on 32 first tests2.8 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Exhaust fumes causing a danger to health of persons on board are graded Dangerous, and so is a silencer likely to become detached. Fumes entering the cabin are Major. One or more missing or defective mountings does not necessarily make the exhaust insecure, since testers assess the overall security of the system.

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

One fault and one wear pattern. The strongest is the rigid brake pipes (front): 4.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Rigid brake pipes (front)

Failed on 30 first tests4.3 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Chafing, corrosion or damage to a rigid brake pipe justifies rejection once its wall thickness is reduced by a set amount, although DVSA accepts this is not easy to determine. If a tester is not sure, the benefit of the doubt applies. A leaking pipe or connection is graded Dangerous on a hydraulic system and Major on an air system.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 56 first tests, 2.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake pads (rear)

Failed on 23 first tests2.1 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.

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 bearings (front)

Noted on 20 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
62in 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
31in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 61.8% of 1,051 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 69.3%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 7 fixed and the 31 not fixed make the 38 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

40608010020002006201020152020Older carsNewer cars
4060801002000200620102020Older carsNewer cars

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

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
199673 in every 100328
199766 in every 100726
199868 in every 100717
199966 in every 100743
200062 in every 100670
200163 in every 100878
200265 in every 100902
200363 in every 1001,135
200465 in every 1001,474
200565 in every 1001,426
2006 This car62 in every 1001,051
200765 in every 100899
200868 in every 100550
200965 in every 100367
201076 in every 100583
201173 in every 100425
201282 in every 100387
201383 in every 100407
201481 in every 100684
201584 in every 100688
201687 in every 100576
201786 in every 100434
201887 in every 100579
201987 in every 100571
202087 in every 100395
202188 in every 100452
202291 in every 100923

FAQs

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

The 2006 Toyota Land Cruiser follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Drive shaft joints and boots (front), about 16 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 61.8% of 1,051 first MOTs on the 2006 Toyota Land Cruiser passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 69.3%. Among 401 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Chassis condition (rear) appears more often than on similar cars (8.2% of those tests; 33 observed failures; about 5.2× 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 Toyota Land Cruiser at the first attempt were Drive shaft joints and boots (front) (15.8%) and Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (15.8%), 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: Chassis condition (rear) (8.2% of those tests; 33 observed failures; about 5.2× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Chassis condition (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (8.2% of those tests; 33 observed failures; about 5.2× 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 Toyota Land Cruiser include Chassis condition (rear), Rigid brake pipes (front), Exhaust system. 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 Toyota Land Cruiser (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