I have door cracks that are starting do develop on the front door check arms that hold the door open as well as stop it from opening to far. If not repaired, the check-arm reinforcement may eventually detach from the door structure. This can cause a rattling noise and increased door opening/closing efforts. It may also interfere with door glass operation and the ability of the check arm to hold the door in the open position. This could also compromise the hinges if the crack grows and may effect the door in an impact causing a safety hazard for the front occupants. I was alerted to inspect for this problem a message board for this vehicle. Some have been able to have the door replaced under warranty while other say Ford/Lincoln will not handle it at all.
The worst 2022 Lincoln Nautilus problems
Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.
- Body9
- Transmission3
- Brakes1
- Driver assistance1
- Electrical1
Problems by type
Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.
- Body9
- Transmission3
- Brakes1
- Driver assistance1
- Electrical1
- Engine1
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 2022 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 2022 Lincoln Nautilus 90
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
- New vehicle delivery hold –
- 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
2022 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 2022 Lincoln Nautilus owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
The contact owns a 2022 Lincoln Nautilus. The contact stated that when opening the front driver-side door, squeaking occurred near the check link. The contact noticed structural stress pulling the door apart, causing cracks in the interior steel. The dealer was contacted. The manufacturer was notified of the failure by telephone. The failure mileage was approximately 32,000.
There was a slight popping noise when closing my driver door for a few days, I thought It was the mirror. Took my car for an oil change and mentioned the noise. They checked it out and said the door check was broken, which they would fix for me at no charge, but they can't fix it because the my door frame was broken, "shattered" is how they described itso they can't fix the check because they're nothing to attach it to. They said that the entire door needs to be replaced. I am 5 months out of factory warranty. Someone from my extended warranty came to inspect it but said they will not cover it. The dealer told me that this is a known problem and they were frustrated that Lincoln is not addressing it or paying for the repairs. They quoted me over $4000 for the entire replacement/repair.
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 shop personnel say (anonymously) they're seeing lots of Lincoln Nautilus with this issue.
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.
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, depress brakes but no response to any of the commands. At this point so not to hurt anyone else drove into a fenced field and back out eventually hitting a tree head on. Prior to this occurring there was reporting to dealership of hard shifting but nothing else and dealership wrote off to the adaptive learning of the transmission. Vehicle was inspected by the Lincoln rep with assistance from the dealership / svc dept. and was deemed nothing was found to be wrong with car per the data box of vehicle, BUT the dealership noted in the finding in emails that the black box was only scanned for the day the Lincoln rep was at vehicle NOT the day the vehicle was in accident. as noted above the vehicle did appear o not be responding correctly driving the destination that day but it was minor not something that would have caused concern at that time BUT again on the way back home is when the incident occurred and was on phone at that time panicking on what to do hence ended up driving off road and ending up stopping due running into the tree.
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 regarding this defect but refused assistance or goodwill coverage, citing a minor calendar expiration of the factory warranty. If left unaddressed by the manufacturer, this stamping defect risks the door catching wind, overextending, or failing to latch and secure properly while the vehicle is in motion, presenting a direct risk to occupants and nearby traffic.
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.
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.
Lincoln Nautilus door hinge and check strap area of the driver's door has a significant crack which could lead to door failure in the event of a crash. Manufacture has issued a CSP (Customer Satisfaction Program 23B56. Year models 2022-2024. Mine is a 2022 but the VIN does not fall in the range of known defects. Mfg. refused repair based on the VIN, but all other criteria have been met. Dealer acknowledges the defect.
Compare the 2022 Lincoln Nautilus
Other model years
Questions about the 2022 Lincoln Nautilus
Is the 2022 Lincoln Nautilus reliable?
Owners have filed 16 complaints about the 2022 Lincoln Nautilus, fewer than a typical Nautilus model year.
What is the 2022 Lincoln Nautilus year score?
The 2022 Lincoln Nautilus scores 81 out of 100 (good). 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 2022 Lincoln Nautilus?
Body and structure, with 9 complaints. Next is transmission (3).
How many recalls does the 2022 Lincoln Nautilus have?
2 recalls, covering back over prevention and engine and engine cooling.
What gas mileage does the 2022 Lincoln Nautilus get?
Official estimates for the 2022 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 2022 Lincoln Nautilus?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history