CSR
Check a VIN

Look up

About

Lincoln · NHTSA safety record

2022 Lincoln Nautilus

Every safety complaint, recall and defect investigation the US government holds on this vehicle.

Owners have filed 13 safety complaints about the 2022 Lincoln Nautilus with the US government. Of those, 1 describes a crash and no death is recorded. 2 recall campaigns are open against it, covering back-over prevention and the engine and its cooling.

The most complained-about system is the body structure, named in 6 complaints, 46% of the total.

Compiled from NHTSA's complaint, recall and investigation files · Covers April 2025 to September 2026 · How this is counted

What is on file

13 complaints on file

13

Complaints

1

Describe a crash

0

Mention fire

0

People injured

0

Deaths

A complaint is an unverified account by the person who filed it, not a finding of fault. One complaint is one ODI number, which is how NHTSA counts them.

A recall is the manufacturer conceding a defect, and the repair is free. Whether one covers your particular car is a question only its VIN can answer, because a campaign covers a production range rather than a model year.

Which system owners named

Complaints naming each system
STRUCTURE 6 · 46%
POWER TRAIN 3 · 23%
UNKNOWN OR OTHER 3 · 23%
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 1 · 8%
ENGINE 1 · 8%
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE 1 · 8%
SERVICE BRAKES 1 · 8%
0 4 8

Red marks a system with a recall campaign against it. One complaint can name several systems, so these add up to more than 13.

When the complaints arrived

By the year NHTSA received them

By the year NHTSA received them, which is not the year the failures happened. They peaked in 2026 at 12.

16 12 8 4
25 26

This is the year the complaint was filed, not the year the failure happened. The range runs from 2025 to 2026, the last of them a part year, which is why its column is drawn faint.

Crash test ratings

NHTSA New Car Assessment Program

NHTSA crashes a car into a barrier and a pole and measures what happens to the dummies inside. This is what it awarded the 2022 Lincoln NAUTILUS, and it is a separate question from what owners report going wrong later.

Test SUV AWD SUV FWD
Overall
Frontal crash
Frontal, driver
Frontal, passenger
Side crash
Side barrier
Side pole
Rollover
Chance of rollover 15.5% 15.5%
Stability control standard Forward collision warning standard Lane departure warning standard

A rating belongs to a tested body style and drivetrain, not to the model as a whole, which is why more than one is listed. A dash means NHTSA did not rate that test for this vehicle.

Recall campaigns

2 on file

BACK OVER PREVENTION:SOFTWARE

25V315000 · May 9, 2025

The defect
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2024 Bronco, F-150, 2021-2024 Edge, 2022-2025 Escape, F-250, F-350, F-450, F-550, F-600, 2022-2024 Expedition, 2022-2025 Transit, 2021-2023 Mach-E, 2024 Ranger, Mustang, 2021-2023 Lincoln Nautilus, 2022-2024 Navigator, and 2023-2024 Corsair vehicles. A software error may cause the rearview camera image to delay, freeze, or not display when the vehicle is in reverse.
The risk
A frozen or missing rearview camera image can reduce the driver's view behind the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
The remedy
The accessory protocol interface module (APIM) software will be updated by a dealer or through an over-the-air update, free of charge. This will be a phased campaign, with the remedy becoming available in different phases based on model and model years. Interim letters notifying owners of the safety risk were mailed on June 26, 2025. Additional letters will be mailed once the final remedy is available on each phase. Owner notification letters were sent on October 8, 2025. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S49.

Ford Motor Company · up to 1,076,138 vehicles across all model years covered

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE:HARD PARTS INTERNAL/MECHANICAL

24V635000 · August 23, 2024

The defect
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2022 Bronco, F-150, Edge, Explorer, Lincoln Nautilus, and Lincoln Aviator vehicles equipped with either a 2.7L or 3.0L Nano EcoBoost engine. The engine intake valves may break while driving, which can result in engine failure and a loss of drive power.
The risk
A loss of drive power increases the risk of a crash.
The remedy
Dealers will perform an engine cycle test and replace the engine as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed July 3, 2025. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 24S55.

Ford Motor Company · up to 90,736 vehicles across all model years covered

Defect investigations

1 on file

An investigation means NHTSA has decided a pattern is worth examining. A preliminary evaluation is often closed with no action; an engineering analysis is the stage that usually precedes a recall.

Loss of Motive Power

EA23002

Closed engineering analysis · opened September 29, 2023 · closed October 31, 2024 · led to recall 24V635

the engine

On July 22, 2022, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) granted a Defect Petition (DP22001) and opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE22007) to investigate allegations of loss of motive power in model year (MY) 2021 Ford Bronco vehicles equipped with 2.7L EcoBoost engines. Complainants were reporting sudden engine failure while driving resulting in a loss of motive power, often without the ability to restart. During PE22007, the cause of engine failure and loss of motive power in the subject vehicles was determined to be intake valve fracture, and the full scope of vehicles affected by the subject defect was identified as all MY 2021-2022 Ford and Lincoln models equipped with either the 2.7L or 3.0L EcoBoost engines, referred to as the “Nano” engine family.  If an intake valve fractures in the subject engines, it may drop into the cylinder and contact the piston, often resulting in catastrophic engine damage. On September 29, 2023, PE22007 was upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA23002) to further investigate the subject defect across the full scope of affected vehicles. During EA23002, ODI visited Ford facilities to review technical information related to intake valve fracture in “Nano” engines, coordinated with NHTSA’s Vehicle Research and Testing Center (VRTC), and analyzed updated field data relating the subject defect. Forensic analysis of fractured intake valves demonstrated that the defective components exhibited “grinding burn” or out of specification hardness in the area of the keeper grooves. The presence of grinding burn is evidence that during the groove grinding phase of production, the temperature of the valve became sufficiently high to alter the microstructure of the material and is indicative that the valve supplier’s manufacturing processes were not within control specifications. Grinding burn results in a hard, brittle microstructure and high residual stresses toward the surface of the valve. Through normal engine loading, a valve with grinding burn will likely fracture at the area of highest vulnerability, which is the third keeper groove. In its response to the EA23002 Information Request (IR) letter, Ford provided evidence of 396 customer complaints (including field reports), 825 warranty claims, and 936 engine exchanges. When considering both ODI and manufacturer failure report data, there have been reports representing 1066 unique vehicles within the subject vehicle population. Analysis of the failure report data demonstrates that vehicles equipped with potentially defective intake valves were built within a production “spike period” of May 2021 – October 2021. The beginning of the spike period corresponds to a ramp up in production at the valve supplier manufacturing facility, and the end of the spike period aligns with the implementation of several mid-production process improvements and the decision to change the metal alloy used to produce intake valves from “Silchrome Lite” to “Silchrome 1”. Ford began investigating the subject defect in July 2021, determined the root cause, and took corrective measures for the new production vehicles. Analysis of the failure report data demonstrates that these corrective actions were successful in eliminating the risk of intake valve fracture for subject vehicles produced after October 2021. However, Ford did not take any field action to address vehicles produced during the spike period, and in the several months following the implementation of the production changes, a significant number of field failures continued to occur. It is Ford’s assessment that not all valves produced during the spike period are defective, and that failures associated with the subject defect occur at low time in service. Analysis of the failure report data demonstrates that the vast majority of failures have occurred before 20,000 miles with over half of all reported failures occurring before 5,000 miles. The rate of reported failures related to the subject defect has steadily decreased since November 2021. ODI coordinated with NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) to conduct statistical analysis and predict the number of future failures associated with the subject defect. The results of this analysis, and the trends identified through the failure report data are generally consistent with Ford’s assessment that defective intake valves will likely fail at a low time in service and indicate that the majority of subject vehicles equipped with defective valves have already experienced a failure. On August 23, 2024, Ford submitted recall 24V635 for subject vehicles equipped with “Nano” engines and built within the production spike period identified above (total population 90,736 vehicles). The remedy includes an inspection at a Ford/Lincoln dealership where the lifetime engine cycles of the vehicle will be determined. If a vehicle does not meet a threshold for lifetime engine cycles, the dealership will conduct a high RPM engine cycle accumulation procedure, which aims to identify if the vehicle is equipped with defective intake valves. Any vehicle that fails the accumulation procedure will receive an engine replacement under the recall. In addition to recall 24V635, Ford has stated that it will launch customer satisfaction campaign 24N12, which will provide extended warranty coverage to the subject vehicles through the earlier of 10 years or 150,000 miles. In view of the recall action being taken by Ford, ODI is closing this Engineering Analysis. To review the reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

In owners’ own words

Quoted from the complaint file

Quoted from NHTSA's complaint file. These are unverified accounts by the people who filed them, not findings of fault.

SERVICE BRAKES

crash · towed

Unsure which individual or multiple system components failing. All occurred within 5 miles of home. Driving to destination noted that vehicle was acting or responding weird but did not show signs of any failure reported to daughter while speaking to her on the hands free system in vehicle but did not really pay much attention to what was happening because it did not affect the driving at that time. Approx. 1hr later left destination to head home and vehicle decided it had a mind of its own and would not respond to most physical commands ie, braking, slowing down, etc. and was actually increasing in speed. attempted to change the vehicle shifter to park, push the engine on / off button,

NHTSA complaint 11757247, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

POWER TRAIN

towed · 149,200 miles

The contact owns a 2022 Lincoln Nautilus. The contact stated that while another person was driving approximately 15-50 MPH, the vehicle sputtered and jerked. The vehicle was driven to the workplace, and the contact attempted to test-drive the vehicle. The contact stated that upon starting the vehicle and shifting to drive, there was delay while responding, with a clunking sound coming from the vehicle. The contact stated that the vehicle failed to shift into gear the following day. The contact stated that upon shifting to reverse, the vehicle jerked forward, and upon shifting to park(P), there was a delay before the vehicle responded. There was a delay after shifting out of park(P). There

NHTSA complaint 11715875, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

STRUCTURE:BODY
Both of the front doors have developed loud popping noises while opening and closing. A temporary fix was done by Lincoln on the passenger front door (at my expense) and the driver door is not having the same issue. Vehicle not under warranty now, so cost to me will be >$4000. Based on discussions with Lincoln body shop personnel and web search, this is a problem that has occurred with other Ford Vehicles, particularly the Escape. IF not fixed, web says internal spot welds on the door check bracket can break, causing a loud popping noise when the door opens, potential window track damage, or the door check separating from the door frame. So the door could fall off in extreme cases..... Body

NHTSA complaint 11761661, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

UNKNOWN OR OTHER
Both front doors were replaced under warranty, as the point where the hinge stop attached to the doors, was making a loud cracking sound. The dealer found that the internal metal of the doors was seperating. Our car was fixed at 48,000 miles, but in online forums, there are many people reporting this, and either have more than 50,000 miles or the dealers are saying it's not covered. Also now that we have our doors replaced, I'm skeptical that the paint will not last as long as the factory applied paint.

NHTSA complaint 11761207. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

STRUCTURE:BODY
The driver’s side front door inner sheet metal housing has suffered a severe structural failure where the door check-arm brackets mount to the vehicle frame. Under completely normal vehicle operation, the thin-gauge metal has cracked, buckled, and completely torn away from the inner door assembly. This creates an immediate safety hazard as the door can no longer be safely controlled, dampening its swing. A certified independent collision center evaluated the damage and officially recommended a total door shell replacement, explicitly warning that localized spot-weld patching is structurally insufficient to restore safety due to metal fatigue. Lincoln Client Services was formally contacted

NHTSA complaint 11757108, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

STRUCTURE:BODY
Drivers side door hinge has completely broken away from interior side panel. This is a know manufacturing defect due to the weight of the door on this vehicle. We called dealership on 5/4/2026 after discovering issue, spoke with the service manager who advised us to bring vehicle to the dealership. On 5/5/2026 the vehicle was brought to Tasca Collision Center a service team member took extensive pictures of damage, stated how the repair would go forth which has since not happened. Tasca and Lincoln have refused to make repair stating that the vehicle was out of warranty effective 5/4/2026. This is also a safety issue in the advent of a side crash.

NHTSA complaint 11754440. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

STRUCTURE:BODY
Spot welds in both front doors are failing. How would these cars do in a side impact with failing spot welds? The drivers door has approximately a 4" tear/crack around the broken spot welds.

NHTSA complaint 11751759. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

Compare

Other years of the Lincoln Nautilus

Model year Complaints Recalls Deaths
2025 21 6 —
2024 22 7 —
2021 23 2 —
2020 33 5 —
2019 102 8 —

Other 2022 Lincoln models

Aviator 45 Corsair 35 Corsair PHEV 22 Navigator 21 Aviator PHEV 15

Complaints on file, same model year.

Every Lincoln on this site — 85 vehicles.

If this is your car and a dealer keeps failing to fix it, your state's lemon law may require the manufacturer to replace it or buy it back. How many repair attempts it takes, and how long you have to file, is set by the state you bought in and by nothing on this page.

Where these numbers come from

A complaint is one owner's account and has not been verified by NHTSA or by us. A vehicle with more complaints is not necessarily worse: models that sold in larger numbers collect more of them. How this is counted.

Compiled and maintained by
Independent developer and analyst