Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Toyota RAV4 2006: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 57 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2006 Toyota RAV4 were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Individual sidelight or tail light (front).

Summary

A 2006 Toyota RAV4 passed first time about 4 in every 100 less often than the average of the 2005 and 2007 model years.

At a glance

How 1,936 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
57 in every 100
Did not pass first time
43 in every 100827 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
19 yearsabout 110,842 miles
First tests counted
1,936

What failed most often

  1. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)19 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Suspension mounting area (rear)10 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (front)8 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 RAV4 vehicles in 2025, not a prediction that any one car will have them. Faults are grouped by part of the car. 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 (rear): 23 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 825 of 827 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.

Anti-roll bar linkage (rear)

Failed on 45 first tests23 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

An anti-roll bar linkage is graded Dangerous when a suspension component is missing, likely to become detached, fractured or likely to fail. Insecure attachment that impairs directional stability is graded Dangerous too. Excessive damage or corrosion that seriously weakens the part is Major, and so is plain insecure attachment to the chassis or axle.

Shock absorbers (front)

Failed on 42 first tests2.5 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Slight seepage that leaves a film of fluid on a shock absorber does not fail it. Severe leakage, or damage so that it does not function, is Major. A shock absorber missing or likely to become detached is graded Dangerous, though a missing one is only rejected if shock absorbers were fitted as standard.

Suspension mounting area (rear)

Failed on 86 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

The load bearing structure within a set distance of a sub-frame, spring or suspension component mounting is a prescribed area. Major applies when its strength or continuity is significantly reduced or it is inadequately repaired. Dangerous applies when it is so weakened that control of the vehicle is likely to be adversely affected.

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

Seat belts and restraints

One fault: seat belt condition (rear), 3.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Seat belt condition (rear)

Failed on 29 first tests3.4 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Any sign of overstretching is a deficiency, and so is a cut anywhere on a child seat belt. On other belts the size of a cut decides it, with a stricter limit at the webbing edge than away from it. Webbing significantly stretched or weakened has rows in both Major and Dangerous grades.

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

Brakes

One fault: handbrake lever, 3.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Handbrake lever

Failed on 23 first tests3.1 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A parking brake lever pivot or ratchet mechanism that is obviously worn is graded Minor. It is Major when worn to the extent that the brake may inadvertently release, and also when the ratchet is not holding correctly. A lever must have obvious excessive travel before being rejected.

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

Body and structure

One fault: exhaust system, 2.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Exhaust system

Failed on 62 first tests2.6 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.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 83 first tests, 2.1 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.

Coil spring

Noted on 22 first tests2.7 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm (rear)

Noted on 45 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension sub-frame (rear)

Noted on 114 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm (front)

Noted on 35 first tests2.1 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
57in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
9in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
34in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 57.3% of 1,936 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 65.9%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 9 fixed and the 34 not fixed make the 43 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Petrol and diesel

First testsPassed first time, as tested
Petrol1,60358
Diesel33153

Figures are in every 100 first tests.

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. A year earlier (2024), when these cars were a year younger, 61 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
199856 in every 100459
199963 in every 100373
200060 in every 100389
200162 in every 100808
200260 in every 1001,544
200361 in every 1002,179
200461 in every 1002,857
200563 in every 1002,942
2006 This car57 in every 1001,936
200759 in every 1002,836
200859 in every 1002,869
200961 in every 1001,429
201069 in every 100427
201168 in every 100458
201271 in every 1001,489
201376 in every 1004,288
201479 in every 1004,492
201581 in every 1005,189
201682 in every 1007,354
201782 in every 1007,501
201883 in every 1007,041
201991 in every 1008,590
202091 in every 10011,168
202191 in every 10011,743
202294 in every 1009,602

FAQs

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

A 2006 Toyota RAV4 passed first time about 4 in every 100 less often than the average of the 2005 and 2007 model years. In 2025, 57.3% of 1,936 first MOTs on the 2006 Toyota RAV4 passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 65.9%. Among 827 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Anti-roll bar linkage (rear) appears more often than on similar cars (5.5% of those tests; 45 observed failures; about 23× 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 RAV4 at the first attempt were Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (18.5%), Suspension mounting area (rear) (10.4%) and Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (front) (8.0%), 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 (rear) (5.5% of those tests; 45 observed failures; about 23× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Anti-roll bar linkage (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (5.5% of those tests; 45 observed failures; about 23× 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 RAV4 include Anti-roll bar linkage (rear), Seat belt condition (rear), Handbrake lever. 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 RAV4 (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