Date   : Mon, 06 Mar 2006 14:21:06 -0000
From   : "David Hunt" <dm.hunt@...>
Subject: Re: 3.5 / 5.25 floppy disk reliability

Hi,
 
> Have been running my beeb with a 3.5 pc drive for a few months now, and 
> running out of old 3.5 double density disks.  Have heard that you can use 
> modern high density disks by covering a hole, but may have problems with 
> long term reliability because the magnetic layer is different to double 
> density disks. Would be interested to hear about your experience if you 
> have been using high densitiy disks as double density. 

Although not recommended, covering the media sense hole does work provided
you use the a HD drive to read and write the data. I also run out of DD
discs, sometime last year and I've not had any problems using HD as DD yet -
panic sets in as I look for some wood to touch - aaah head, that'll do!
 
> I started off using 5.25 disks, but had to clean the heads every week or 
> so with the brown gunk from the disks. Is this a common problem or do I 
> just have a poor batch of disks ?

Yes, you must have a bad set of discs or your drive heads are abrasive,
personally, I'd go for the former and get yourself some decent 5.25"
floppies.

> Which disks should be more reliable, have heard that technically 5.25 
> disks should be, but just wondering if in practice that 3.5 disks are a 
> better option ?

3.5" discs **SHOULD** be more reliable due to its non-flexible and sealed
construction. However, I've had more duff 3.5" discs than 5.25". I remember
almost losing a days work for my Father because a big lump of goo landed on
the surface of the disc. Luckliy, I could rip apart the floppy and get the
disc out, clean off the worst and then read it. Also lucky was the fact the
drive was single sided 40T so the gunk landed on the unused side!

I'm finding new 5.25" discs hard (read expensive) to get hold of now. I have
around 200 new discs left. On the other hand 3.5" HD discs are almost give
away prices from wholesalers.

Dave ;)