Interesting, I've been told the only difference between the F-250HD and the F-350 is the solid axle.

 

There's no such thing as a "F450" prior to 1999 either but that doesn't mean Ford didn't start making them in 1987.It means they just called them something else "F-Super Duty".

There's such a thing as a light duty F250 (or perhaps more correctly stated one should call it F150HD). It's just that Ford didn't call them either.
IMO this truck should have never been built OR all F150's should have simply been built to this spec.
Ford actually incorrectly called two very different trucks (one based on a f150 platform while the other was the f350 platform), both F250's but that didn't make their wrong a right,in either case.

Such things,yes.Such terminology,no.Your correct.I wasn't contesting the terminology though.Just describing the trucks as to what they actually are.

The "lighter rated F250" prior to '99 was "really" a F150 with a semi floating sterling out back,perhaps a few minor differences too, while the "heavier rated F250" prior to '99 was the exact same truck in 2wd form as the srw F350 pickup and in 4wd form,different front ends and blocks out back to account for the height differences.

But no matter what Ford or we called them and what terms we like or dislike, the fact remains the same in that he can't turn his "F250" (the one with the lighter rating) into a "F250" (the one with the higher rating and known as F250HD specifically in '97) because the foundation isn't there to do so, like you can turn a F250 (hd version) into a F350 4wd and or dually of your choice....however still not including on paper even then though,like you say.

 

Essentially that's what I just said. The solid axle comes with different (actually lighter) front springs, a track bar, a driveshaft with a double cardan joint at the transfer case and maybe one or two other changes. But if you do a solid axle swap it should include all of those. And the F-350 has taller lift blocks in the rear since the front end has to sit higher to make room for the diff. but the rest of the parts are the same.

 

I guess what bugs me the most about this (and as you say, it's just naming conventions so it really doesn't matter that much) is the implication that an F-250 isn't a real 3/4 ton truck. Up through '98 the F-250s had essentially the same ratings they always had. I suppose you could call them heavy duty heavy duty half tons (the F-150 being a heavy duty half ton itself), but that's a lot more awkward than just calling them what they are: 3/4 ton trucks.

But the ratings do just get really crowded. There was the F-100 (1/2 ton), F-150 (5/8 ton?), F-250 (3/4 ton), F-250HD (7/8 ton?) and F-350 (1 ton). There certainly didn't need to be that many and the differences in capabilities get really small. But which ones should be dropped? In the end only the F-100 was.

I guess a semantic difference is that I'd say that Ford, by definition, calls vehicles the "right" thing. They built it, they named it, so that's its name. Anything else is wrong. It might still be understandable, but when people start using different names it opens up the possibilities for confusion.

But I'll certainly agree that Ford naming two COMPLETELY different '97 trucks "F-250" was not a Better Idea!

I agree with all of this. But the "F-250HD" name started a lot earlier than '97. That might be the only year the badging included "heavy duty", but when I ordered my '85 new it was called "F-250HD" on the order sheet.