Model Reports
8 min readUpdated 11 Sep 2026
DVSA open data · 1,028 tests analysed
Volvo Xc70 2005: reliability & common MOT faults
421 first-attempt MOT failures were recorded on the 2005 Volvo Xc70 in 2025. Figures are among first-attempt failed MOT tests, not among all tests.
Rbt (sp) was the most common reason a 2005 Xc70 failed its MOT — 18.8% of its failed first attempts.
First-attempt pass
59.0%
of 1,028 first tests (2025)
First tests
1,028
test year 2025
Failed first attempts
421
failed first-attempt tests
MOT pass rates
First-attempt and official-style rates among class 4 first tests of the year.
First-attempt pass
59.0%
of 1,028 first tests (2025)
Official-style pass
63.8%
incl. same-day PRS fixes
First tests
1,028
class 4 · first MOT of the year
Typical age 20.0 yrs · median mileage 164,796 mi
vs 2024:
+3.1 pp first-attempt
Note:
Class 4 cars · first MOT of the year per vehicle · P/PRS/F outcomes (2025 data).
PRS (fixed at the station the same day) counts as a fail in the first-attempt rate.
Raw outcomes for this cohort — not adjusted for age, mileage, or peer mix.
MOT doesn't test engine or gearbox internals.
Advisories
Notes recorded at the test that appear more often than on similar cars.
Advisory notes recorded on failed first-attempt tests that appear more often than on similar cars.
Advisory pattern
Location
Notes
vs similar cars
Share
Confidence
Pins and bushes (rear)
Suspension > Anti-roll bars > Pins and bushes
Rear
27
×6.4
6.4%
Elevated
Pins and bushes (front)
Suspension > Suspension arms > Pins and bushes
Front
96
×2.4
22.8%
Elevated
Note: Advisories are not a fail rate — they flag issues noted at the test, often before they become failures.
If you are buying one
What this year's MOT record means for the decision in front of you.
Nothing separates this year from the Xc70 either side of it, so buy on the individual car. The checks below are the items that actually failed 2005 Xc70, commonest first.
Other Xc70 years worth knowing about
Newer cars always pass more often, so a plain "best year" list would just
rank by age. These are the years that beat or miss the trend their own
neighbouring years set — the only age-adjusted signal this data supports.
The items that failed 2005 Xc70 most
often, as a share of the year's failed first attempts. This is what goes
wrong, not what is unusual — the table further up the page covers that.
Rbt (sp) — recorded on 18.8% of failed first attempts
Position lamp (front) — recorded on 18.5% of failed first attempts
Headlamp aim — recorded on 13.5% of failed first attempts
Every figure here is a first-attempt MOT rate from DVSA open data for this
model line. 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.
Rbt (sp) was the most common reason a 2005 Xc70 failed its MOT — 18.8% of its failed first attempts. In 2025, 59.0% of 1,028 first MOTs on the 2005 Volvo Xc70 passed first time (PRS — items fixed at the station the same day — counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 63.8%. Among 421 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), we highlight MOT failure patterns that show up more often than on…
Ranked by how often they were actually recorded, the items that failed 2005 Volvo Xc70s most often at the first attempt were Rbt (sp) (18.8%), Position lamp (front) (18.5%) and Headlamp aim (13.5%) — each as a share of the year's failed first attempts. That is what goes wrong on the car. It is a different question from which patterns are unusual for the class, which the common-faults table answers.
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 2005 Volvo Xc70 (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.
20242025
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.
We never invent pass rates, star scores, or ranks when those data marts are missing.