F-150 Lightning Official EPA Range MPGe Revealed in Window Sticker (Base + Extended Range)!

[gorwell]

F-150 Lightning window sticker I obtained.

Platinum:

Base Lightning sticker:

Base Extended Range:

Assuming it's real, this would be the first EPA ranges. I compared w/ Rivian:


Kwh/100 Miles:

R1T: 48

Lightning Standard: 49
Lightning Extended: 48
Lightning Platinum: 51


Combined:

R1T: 70 MPGe

Lightning Standard: 68
Lightning Extended: 70
Lightning Platinum:66

City:

R1T: 74 MPGe

Lightning Standard: 76
Lightning Extended: 78
Lightning Platinum: 73


Highway:

R1T: 66

Lightning Standard: 61
Lightning Extended:63
Lightning Platinum:60


As you would expect given the bigger Truck, the Lightning takes a bigger hit at freeway speeds.

Then, the Platinum (as expected) is less efficient overall. However, the sticker still states a 300 mile range. But, I believe we were expecting ~270-280 based on previous comments.



Updated with consolidated window stickers by @vandy1981
(source: https://www.f150gen14.com/forum/thr...-sticker-base-extended-range.9441/post-185046)

Consolidated window stickers for Pro SR, Pro ER, Lariat ER and Platinum. I couldn't find any XLT or Lariat SR window stickers on the vehicles that were listed on Auto Trader. Someone with more time may be able to find them by randomly entering VINs.

 

[greenne]

F-150 Lightning window sticker I found.

Assuming it's real, this would be the first EPA ranges. I compared w/ Rivian:



Kwh/100 Miles:

R1T: 48

Lightning: 49

~2% less efficient.

Combined:

R1T: 70 MPGe

Lightning: 68

~3% less efficient.

City:

R1T: 74 MPGe

Lightning: 76

~3% less efficient.

Highway:

R1T: 66

Lightning: 61

~8% less efficient.

As you would expect given the bigger Truck, the Lightning takes a bigger hit at freeway speeds.

One small correction...the Lightning is actually slightly MORE efficient in the city than the Rivian!

 

[gorwell]

One small correction...the Lightning is actually slightly MORE efficient in the city than the Rivian!

Corrected. Thanks!

 

[greenne]

If we extrapolate this out to the larger battery with

230mi range from 98KwH battery = 2.35 mi/KwH

Range for the extended battery would be 2.35* 131 KwH = 307.44mi**

**Assuming there is a weight penalty mileage may be right at Ford estimate of 300mi**

As always this is very hypothetical, YMMV.

 

[vandy1981]

Extended range sticker below. Note EPA range is 300 which beats the originally advertised target EPA range for the Platinum.

I wonder why this hasn't been publicized yet?

 

[gpbst3]

If we extrapolate this out to the larger battery with

230mi range from 98KwH battery = 2.35 mi/KwH

Range for the extended battery would be 2.35* 131 KwH = 307.44mi**

**Assuming there is a weight penalty mileage may be right at Ford estimate of 300mi**

As always this is very hypothetical, YMMV.

On an XLT trim its an extra 20k for approximately 70 more miles per charge. That will be a tough pill to swallow.

 

[vandy1981]

And a Pro ER with 320 miles of EPA range!!!

 

[greenne]

Extended range sticker below. I wonder why this hasn't been publicized yet?

Something else to consider...for the ER truck posted above its a Platinum trim truck. Ford has said they expected that trim to be at 280mi range due to the larger 22in wheels. So I wonder if they were off or the ER XLT/Lariats will get better mpgE (and range) than this sticker.

 

[greenne]

Yep..just beat me to it

 

[Vorador]

And a Pro ER with 320 miles of EPA range!!!

The 48 kWh per 100 miles doesn't come anywhere close to 320 miles of range with a 131 kWh battery. That would only be 272.91 miles. Not sure where the 320 miles is coming from unless they made the extended range battery bigger. Would need a 154 kWh battery to go 320 miles.

 

[gorwell]

The 48 kWh per 100 miles doesn't come anywhere close to 320 miles of range with a 131 kWh battery. That would only be 272.91 miles. Not sure where the 320 miles is coming from unless they made the extended range battery bigger. Would need a 154 kWh battery to go 320 miles.

This is all just "funky" EPA ev math. Until real range tests happen, whatever they note here can be taken as a rough estimate.

Rivian is the same w/ the range suggesting 281, but real world tests have it at EPA range (Edmunds tested it fully).

Same w/ Ioniq 5 as well.

 

[greenne]

The 48 kWh per 100 miles doesn't come anywhere close to 320 miles of range with a 131 kWh battery. That would only be 272.91 miles. Not sure where the 320 miles is coming from unless they made the extended range battery bigger. Would need a 154 kWh battery to go 320 miles.

There's a discussion about this on the Lightning FB group. To summarize the EPA sticker includes charging losses(wall to wheel is how Tom M) describes it, so there will be an 8-12% charging loss factored into the KwH/100mi calculation. In the real world you don't see this( except on your power bill)--it does not impact the battery-->motor connection only from the pug to to the battery.

**Credit to Tom Molog for the explanation--he can explain it much better than I can

 

[gorwell]

To summarize the EPA sticker includes charging losses(wall to wheel is how Tom M) describes it, so there will be an 8-12% charging loss factored into the KwH/100mi calculation. In the real world you don't see this( except on your power bill)--it does not impact the battery-->motor connection only from the pug to to the battery.

Thanks! I remember Tom talking about this and I didn't really take it in. But, now it makes sense.

 

[greenne]

All this is good info but subject to verification by real world tests. However its a good sign than Ford has a 20mi "buffer" from what they were saying for several months now with the 300mi "expectation".

 

[adoublee]

320 EPA miles for Lariat ER - A messaging win!

Sponsored