"The spot welds and inner sheet metal at the driver door check arm attachment point have structurally failed and cracked. This prevents the door from operating safely and creates an imminent risk of the door failing to latch or inadvertently opening while driving, matching the failure mechanism in the federal safety agency Investigation PE 23-013.
The worst 2021 Lincoln Nautilus problems
Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.
Problems by type
Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.
- Body10
- Transmission8
- Engine5
- Electrical3
- Fuel system3
- Driver assistance2
- Acceleration1
Specific symptoms reported on the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus
Recalls 2
Back over prevention: software
- What is wrong
- 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.
- Risk
- A frozen or missing rearview camera image can reduce the driver's view behind the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
- 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.
Recall number 25V315000 · Recall details
Engine and engine cooling: engine: hard parts internal/mechanical
- What is wrong
- 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.
- Risk
- A loss of drive power increases the risk of a crash.
- 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.
Recall number 24V635000 · Recall details
See all 2 recalls for the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus
Defect investigations
Loss of Motive Power
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 âNanoâ 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 âNanoâ engines, coordinated with the federal safety agencyâs 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 âgrinding burnâ 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 supplierâs 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 âspike periodâ of May 2021 â 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 âSilchrome Liteâ to âSilchrome 1â. 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 Fordâs 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 the federal safety agencyâs 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 Fordâs 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 âNanoâ 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
EA23002
Technical service bulletins for the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus 134
Bulletins tell dealers how to fix known problems. A warranty extension means the manufacturer pays for that repair for longer.
- This bulletin supersedes 26-2171
- This bulletin supersedes 26-2297
- This article supersedes TSB 25-2466 to add Bronco Sport, Escape, Maverick and Corsair, as well as removing...
- Various symptoms including but not limited to the auto start/stop system not operating as intended with a...
- This bulletin supersedes 26-2194
- Quality improvements include
- Blank center display screen or black center display after welcome animation
- This bulletin supersedes 25-2627
- Inoperative phone as a key and no communication with the remote function actuator (RFA) module
- This article updates TSB 25-2154
2021 Lincoln Nautilus fuel economy
Official EPA estimates in miles per gallon (MPGe for electric). Ranges cover trims that share the same engine.
| Engine | Drive | City | Highway | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0L 4‑cyl | FWD | 21 | 26 | 23 |
| 2.0L 4‑cyl | AWD | 20 | 25 | 22 |
| 2.7L 6‑cyl | AWD | 19 | 25 | 21 |
What 2021 Lincoln Nautilus owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
Drivers front door inner sheet metal structure has failed/torn at the check arm mounting points under normal operating conditions.. safety hazard. Dealership and Lincoln will not take full responsibility after known structural defect exists. I note on your website that in Nautilus alone there are 10 complaints including mine. Our car had less than 42,000 miles when we noticed. The entire door needs to be replaced.
Drivers front door inner sheet metal structure has failed/torn at the hinge and check arm mounting points under normal operating conditions.. safety hazard. Dealership and Lincoln will not take full responsibility after known structural defect exists
Both front doors on my 2021 Nautilus Reserve have structural stress cracks in the sheet metal surrounding the check-arm bracket, along the edge of the recessed mount and under the weatherstrip. I first noticed cracking and popping when opening and closing the doors on 8/1/2026 at about 84,000 miles. No collision; normal use. The bracket mounts to the inner door panel with no reinforcement. The panel visibly flexes every time the door opens and checks, and that flexing has fatigued and cracked the metal. The cracks are growing. This is a safety issue. Once the bracket tears out, the door has no hold-open or stop. It can be pulled open by wind, strike a person or vehicle beside it, or swing closed on an occupant's arms or legs. Complaint 11767021 reports a 2021 Nautilus door torn from the owner's hand by wind after the check broke. In PE23-013, the federal safety agency's investigation of the same failure on the Ford Escape, the federal safety agency documented 25 injuries, mostly from doors closing on occupants, and cited risk of a door failing to latch, failing to open, or opening while driving. Both my front doors are affected, so the driver and passenger exits are both at risk. At least eight other 2021 Nautilus owners have filed the federal safety agency complaints on the same failure, and Ford Edge owners report it too. Ford covers this failure on the 2020-2023 Escape under CSP 23B56 (reinforcement plate or new door, no cost, no mileage limit), but no recall or program covers the Nautilus or Edge. Lincoln (case CXH-09573152) offered $4,400 goodwill instead of a full repair. Other 2021 Nautilus owners report this failure as early as 20,000 miles, so it is a design flaw, not wear. Re-welding or installing the same unreinforced door will not fix it; any remedy must add reinforcement at the check-arm mount. I request an investigation of front door check-arm related stress cracking on doors of 2019-2023 Nautilus and Edge vehicles. Photos, video, and an evidence brief are available.
Transmission was shuddering when it shifted gears. It would lose power and jerk between each gear. We paid for diagnostic at the dealership and they diagnosed as torque converter shudder under 2 separate TSB's. Dealership offered to fix at a cost of $6400. Told not to drive the vehicle or at least as little as possible. They refused to cover this under the TSBs. Contacted Lincoln Client Care. The shudder became worse even driving through town and it would jerk and the RPMS were jumping all over. Also took it to AAMCO after dealership stated they would not cover it under a TSB. AAMCO provided free diagnostic and came to the same conclusion of the torque converter and estimated cost of $3300, which was 3100 less than dealership. Asked Lincoln for goodwill fix and they spent a month talking to the dealership trying to get the dealership to a lower price, to whichthe dealership raised the price to $6800 and they offered 4k in goodwill, but said that it would take 4 to 6 weeks to get the parts. By this time AAMCO already had the parts after waiting3 weeks on backorder and AAMCO made te fix at an out of pocket cost of $3300. Total out of pocket costs were the 300 for the diagnostic and the 3300 for the torque converter fix.
Noticed cracking sound when opening and closing front drivers door. Subsequently discovered same issue on Ford Edge (recall in place) and many other owners having same problem (FaceBook posts).
Door check is broken in high winds the door pulled out my hand. Could have injured someone of that person was standing near the opening path of the door.
The driver's side door is cracked at the door hinge assembly. This is a widely documented defect. My door cracked at 50,000 miles. There are thousands of 2019-2024 Nautilus's with this defect. Lincoln wants $5,000 to replace the door. They offered $2,000 toward the repair. This should be a recall.
The door broke and cracked the window when I opened the door to get in the car
The contact owns a 2021 Lincoln Nautilus. The contact stated that while the vehicle was at the dealer for an oil change and trade-in, the contact was informed that the front driver’s side door had a crack and that the welding was cracked and loosened. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure, and a case was filed. The failure mileage was approximately 92,800.
Compare the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus
Other model years
Questions about the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus
Is the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus reliable?
Owners have filed 28 complaints about the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus, close to a typical Nautilus model year.
What is the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus year score?
The 2021 Lincoln Nautilus scores 75 out of 100 (average). The score compares it with the other model years of the Lincoln Nautilus: 75 is a typical year, 50 means twice the usual complaints, and serious complaints and recalls lower it.
What is the most common problem with the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus?
Body and structure, with 10 complaints. Next is transmission (8).
How many recalls does the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus have?
2 recalls, covering back over prevention and engine and engine cooling.
What gas mileage does the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus get?
Official estimates for the 2021 Lincoln Nautilus range from 21 to 23 mpg combined. The most efficient version (2.0L 4-cyl, FWD) gets 21 city and 26 highway.
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2021 Lincoln Nautilus?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history