Among the 5 LCV 2019–2023, the F-150 EcoBoost 400 ranks 3rd of 5 in Combined consumption (11.8 L/100, behind the Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170), 4th of 5 in Tank range (831 km, behind the Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170), 3rd of 5 in 0–100 km/h (6.1 s, behind the Ford F-150 Raptor EcoBoost 450).
XIV · GENERATION 2021 → · LCV
FordICE
F-150 EcoBoost 400
405 hp, 6,1 s 0-100 : among the 5 LCV 2019–2023, the F-150 EcoBoost 400 ranks 3rd of 5 in Combined consumption, 4th of 5 in Tank range, 3rd of 5 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
Power
405hp
678 Nm
0 → 100 km/h
6.1s
VMax 180 km/h
Cons.
11.8L
/100 km
Tank
98L
Technical identity card
Full specifications Ford F-150 EcoBoost 400
Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.
Powertrain
| Power | 405 hp |
| Couple | 678 Nm |
| Gearbox | Convertisseur de couple 10 rapports Automatique |
| Transmission | Integrale (AWD) |
Consumption
| Cons. WLTP | 11.8 L/100km |
| Tank | 98 L |
Performance
| 0 → 100 km/h | 6,1 s |
| VMax | 180 km/h |
Dimensions and environment
| Width | 2,004 mm |
| Height | 1,918 mm |
| Kerb weight | 2,268 kg |
| Cd | 0.44 |
Caralogy Methodology
Performance (0-100, top speed) simulated by the Caralogy physics engine (SCx, Crr, real torque curves). Motorway consumption values estimated from the manufacturer WLTP cycle.
See full methodology →Manufacturer data · WLTP-estimated consumption · Caralogy-simulated performance
Among the 5 LCV, the F-150 EcoBoost 400 ranks (mid-table) in fuel consumption. Caralogy simulates its real-world cost: motorway simulation, consumption simulation and performance simulation.
Caralogy Analysis
Tailored to this vehicle?
Fuel consumption: 11.8 L/100 L/100 (3rd of 5 in Combined consumption)
The F-150 EcoBoost 400 consumes 11.8 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170 (7.5 L/100).
Tank range: 831 km (4th of 5 in Tank range)
On a full tank, the F-150 EcoBoost 400 covers 831 km on the combined cycle. The segment reference reaches 1067 km.
Go beyond this analysis
Recalculate everything for your own profile with the three physics simulators that power this page.
Running cost for your profile
Adjust mileage, driving mix and charging type to estimate your annual energy budget.
Launch simulator →Long-distance trip
Simulate any motorway trip: time, charging stops, total cost.
Simulate a trip →Chronos & accélération
0-100, 0-200, courbe de vitesse, positionnement segment.
Voir la performance →Segment positioning
Where the F-150 EcoBoost 400 stands against LCV
Comparison across 5 LCV marketed between 2019–2023.
Combined consumption3e / 5
11.8 L/100
Min 14.7 L/100 · Ford F-150 Raptor EcoBoost 450Max 7.5 L/100 · Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170
Tank range4e / 5
831 km
Min 580 km · Ford Ranger Raptor V6 292Max 1 067 km · Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170
0–100 km/h3e / 5
6,1 s
Min 11,1 s · Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170Max 5,4 s · Ford F-150 Raptor EcoBoost 450
Cross-energy alternatives
Same needs, different powertrain.
Frequently asked questions
Ford F-150 EcoBoost 400: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
831 km on a full tank (11.8 L/100 on the combined cycle) — 4th of 5 in autonomie du segment.
Running costs depend on your profile (mileage, charging type, city/highway mix). Use the Caralogy consumption simulator for a personalised estimate.
The Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170 leads in Combined consumption (7.5 L/100 vs 11.8 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the F-150 EcoBoost 400 vs Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170 duel for a detailed comparison.
Caralogy does not reproduce manufacturer figures: we recalculate every number through physics simulation, starting from SCx, mass and the power curve. This is why our figures at 130 km/h differ from WLTP. Full methodology on the dedicated page.