2008 BMW X5 — MOT failures & pass rate
20,741 MOT tests on the 2008 BMW X5 are in this dataset, and 80.0% of them passed. Large SUVs of a similar age fail 22.8% of the time, so this is 2.8pp better than the group it competes with. Failures cluster in lighting & signalling, suspension and tyres.
What the MOT record shows
No single area dominates — lighting & signalling (10.4%) and suspension (10.1%) are close, so failures are spread across several systems rather than one weak point.
At component level the recurring items are ball joint, washers and position lamp — ball joint alone was recorded 817 times.
Mileage matters less than usual here: the 2008 X5 fails 20.5% of the time in the 0-30k band and 18.4% at 150k+, a spread of only 2.1 points.
Split by fuel, diesel examples fail 3.8pp more often than petrol ones (20.2% vs 16.3%) — worth weighing if you have a choice.
Advisories point at the next bill rather than this one: tyres was flagged on 27.7% of tests without failing them.
How it compares
Top failure categories
| # | Category | % of tests affected | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lighting & signalling | 10.4% | 2,158 |
| 2 | Suspension | 10.1% | 2,091 |
| 3 | Tyres | 5.7% | 1,174 |
| 4 | Brakes | 4.5% | 931 |
| 5 | Visibility | 4.5% | 923 |
| 6 | Body, structure & corrosion | 1.8% | 381 |
Most common specific failures
The exact components most often recorded as failures — more specific than the categories above.
| # | Failure item | Times recorded |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ball joint | 817 |
| 2 | Washers | 807 |
| 3 | Position lamp | 754 |
| 4 | Coil spring | 750 |
| 5 | Headlamp aim | 726 |
| 6 | Headlamp | 673 |
Top advisory categories
Advisories aren't failures, but they flag work likely needed soon — useful when budgeting.
| # | Category | % of tests with advisory | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tyres | 27.7% | 5,739 |
| 2 | Suspension | 26.7% | 5,534 |
| 3 | Brakes | 18.9% | 3,914 |
| 4 | Emissions & environmental | 18.8% | 3,894 |
| 5 | Lighting & signalling | 14.3% | 2,968 |
| 6 | Other defects | 8.2% | 1,710 |
Failure rate by mileage
Higher-mileage cars tend to fail more — often the most useful guide to real condition.
| Mileage band | Tests | Fail rate |
|---|---|---|
| 0-30k | 39 | 20.5% |
| 30-60k | 395 | 16.0% |
| 60-90k | 2,001 | 19.6% |
| 90-120k | 6,074 | 21.0% |
| 120-150k | 7,309 | 20.6% |
| 150k+ | 4,914 | 18.4% |
Failure rate by age
By fuel type
| Fuel | Tests | Fail rate |
|---|---|---|
| Diesel | 19,957 | 20.2% |
| Petrol | 784 | 16.3% |
Trend over time
| Dataset year | Tests | Fail rate |
|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 4,776 | 20.3% |
| 2022 | 4,605 | 20.9% |
| 2023 | 4,218 | 19.6% |
| 2024 | 3,750 | 19.7% |
| 2025 | 3,392 | 19.1% |
What to check before buying a 2008 X5
On a 2008 X5, lighting & signalling is what the MOT record says goes wrong most — it appeared in 10.4% of tests. Check these areas before you commit.
- Lighting & signalling (10.4% of tests): Often a cheap bulb, but persistent issues can mean wiring or corrosion in the units. Typical repair: £10–£150.
- Suspension (10.1% of tests): Worn drop links, bushes, springs or shocks — listen for knocks over bumps and check for uneven tyre wear. Typical repair: £150–£450 per corner.
- Tyres (5.7% of tests): Usually a quick, known-cost fix, but check tread, age and uneven wear (which can hint at alignment or suspension issues). Typical repair: £50–£120 per tyre.
Repair costs are rough UK ballpark ranges to set expectations, not quotes — actual prices vary widely by car, parts and garage.
Frequently asked questions
How many 2008 BMW X5s pass their MOT?
80.0% of the 20,741 2008 BMW X5 MOT tests in this dataset passed — a 20.0% fail rate.
What is the most common MOT failure on a 2008 BMW X5?
Lighting & signalling, recorded in 10.4% of tests, followed by suspension (10.1%).
Does the 2008 X5 get worse with mileage?
Its MOT fail rate rises from 20.5% in the 0-30k band to 18.4% in the 150k+ band.
Methodology & source. Based on 20,741 MOT tests. Dataset: DVSA MOT testing data (2021,2022,2023,2024,2025). Data last updated 2026-07-27. Figures reflect MOT-testable defects only — read the methodology for how these are calculated and what they don't measure.