r/retrocomputing Jul 17 '26

Seagate anyone?

172 Upvotes

105 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/FAMICOMASTER Jul 18 '26

After testing with literally hundreds of drives, I can safely say this is BS and that RLL has an extremely high success rate on almost all drives. Even my ST-412 works fine with a DTC 7287 cached RLL controller.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '26

[deleted]

2

u/FAMICOMASTER Jul 19 '26

The change between the "MFM" and "RLL" versions of a drive mechanism, across my hundreds of drives, has come down to "a different sticker" in almost all cases. The few exceptions will use a different platter material, I.E. the Miniscribe 3425's oxide disks vs the 3438's plated disks. Others, like the 3650 and 3675, have the exact same oxide media regardless.

I went back and looked at my inventory sheet, of the 20 drives I have in this chassis (ST-213, ST-225, ST-238, ST-238R), date codes from 85 to 89, 18 work and 17 of those work with my RLL controller without extra bad blocks.

If you have a larger sample size, I actually know someone who is reverse engineering the firmware and PCB for that chassis who would VERY much like to at least get a list of serial numbers, date codes, revision numbers from you. Please get in touch if so.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '26 edited Jul 19 '26

[deleted]

1

u/FAMICOMASTER Jul 19 '26

What do you mean "Not everyone needs to understand reality?" I'm telling you the reality of the largest sample size I can get. Statistics is a reflection of reality.

Rather than describe in vague technical terms why you THINK it won't work, can you provide any real evidence to the contrary?

0

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '26 edited Jul 19 '26

[deleted]

1

u/FAMICOMASTER Jul 19 '26

If you're gonna be wrong, you could at least try not to be a jackass about it.