2014 Nissan Juke 1.5L Diesel · WD14 ABK

The defining mechanical story of this 2014 Nissan Juke is a front suspension and tyre wear pattern that has surfaced repeatedly across three consecutive MOT tests, alongside a single but significant exhaust failure in 2025. Both 2025 tests recorded advisories for worn suspension arm pins or bushes on the front axle, and an earlier 2023 test produced a Major failure for an excessively worn nearside front lower suspension arm ball joint, with a further Major failure for the offside front anti-roll bar linkage ball joint in April 2025. The most recent test on 14 October 2025 recorded a Pass but retained the front suspension arm pin or bush advisory, indicating that the wear noted earlier in the year had not deteriorated to failure severity. Tyre wear on the inner edges of both front and rear wheels has been flagged in 2022, 2023, and 2025, and the 2025 pass added a further advisory for both front tyres being close to the legal limit on the edge. The April 2025 test also produced a cluster of exhaust Major defects, including a snapped rear box and a major leak at the central or rear joint, which were presumably rectified before the October retest. The recorded mileage of 106,600 over roughly twelve years equates to an average accumulation of around 8,883 miles per year, which is broadly typical for a vehicle of this age and class. There are no extended gaps in the MOT record, with tests occurring annually from 2021 through 2025, suggesting the car has remained in continuous use rather than being laid up for any prolonged period. This consistent annual usage at a moderate rate means that consumables such as brakes, tyres, suspension components, and exhaust mountings have been subjected to steady wear rather than the corrosion and drying-out issues associated with long periods of standing. The cumulative effect on a Juke of this age and mileage is that suspension joints, bushes, and exhaust components are reaching the stage where renewal is becoming a recurring requirement. For a prospective buyer, the front suspension is the priority area for physical inspection. The recurring advisories on the lower arm pin or bush and the two Major failures on the front ball joint and anti-roll bar linkage ball joint within two years suggest that the front suspension is consuming components at a meaningful rate. On a test drive, listen for clonking or knocking noises from the front end, particularly over speed humps, rough surfaces, and when turning at low speed, which are classic indicators of worn ball joints and anti-roll bar drop links. Feel for any vagueness or delay in the steering response, or a noticeable clunk when steering is loaded against the stops, and check for uneven tyre wear on the inner edges, which has been flagged in five separate advisory entries across the record. Uneven inner-edge wear combined with the suspension advisories could indicate that geometry or worn components are pulling the tracking out of specification, so a four-wheel alignment check should be considered after any suspension renewal. The exhaust system warrants close attention beneath the vehicle, given the April 2025 failures for a snapped rear box and an insecure central or rear joint. Although the October 2025 test passed, exhaust repairs on a twelve-year-old vehicle are often localised rather than a full system replacement, so inspect the back box, centre section, and mounting rubbers for blueing, soot staining, hangers that have dropped or torn, and any signs of temporary repair such as excessive use of jointing compound or clamp patches. The braking system should also be examined, as the 2022 test recorded rear brake pads wearing thin, and with two to three years of additional mileage since, the pads and likely the rear discs will be due for assessment. On the road, check for any pulling to one side under braking, a spongy pedal, or any grinding or vibration, which would indicate that further work is required beyond a simple pad change. The headlamp aim failure noted in April 2025 has not recurred, but it is worth confirming that both headlamps produce an even, level beam pattern against a flat wall during an evening inspection.