Hard disc caddy

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

I'd like to add an old hard disc caddy to a newer system that has an
80-pin IDE cable. The internal cable in the caddy is only 40-pin. Will
this discontinuity create any strange issues? I intend to use an old
1.2GB HDD, so I'm not concerned about heat or speed.

The existing slave connector is out of reach of the caddy. Is it just
a simple matter to remove and reposition this connector? I routinely
do this with 40-pin cables by reclamping them in a vice, but I'm not
sure how easy this is to do with finer pitch 80-pin ribbon.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
16 answers Last reply
More about hard disc caddy
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 08:14:07 +1000, Franc Zabkar
    <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote:

    >I'd like to add an old hard disc caddy to a newer system that has an
    >80-pin IDE cable. The internal cable in the caddy is only 40-pin. Will
    >this discontinuity create any strange issues? I intend to use an old
    >1.2GB HDD, so I'm not concerned about heat or speed.

    In that case, no it should be fine, the 80 conductor cable
    will simply be more immune to noise, should work fine.


    >
    >The existing slave connector is out of reach of the caddy. Is it just
    >a simple matter to remove and reposition this connector? I routinely
    >do this with 40-pin cables by reclamping them in a vice, but I'm not
    >sure how easy this is to do with finer pitch 80-pin ribbon.

    It's the same general concept, but with a 3rd (center) row
    iof insulation displacement pins for the grounds. The
    problem is that it becomes much more precision oriented,
    fiddly to get them all lined up perfectly. It's far easier
    to do to a 40 conductor cable so if you had a spare
    40-conductor cable and didn't need 80 conductor (for the
    master device?) then you might just use one instead.
    Otherwise you could try repositioning the cable but I would
    rather buy another cable than risk it, as a poor connection
    may not show up for a period of time, oxidation or movement
    of the cable, thermal changes- whichever...

    It's significantly more difficult to get the 80 conductor
    cable connectors clamped on in perfect positions, let alone
    visually confirm that it looks right- and I'd think it quite
    tedious to check ersistance on every pin before using it.
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 23:05:10 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> put finger to
    keyboard and composed:

    >On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 08:14:07 +1000, Franc Zabkar
    ><fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote:
    >
    >>I'd like to add an old hard disc caddy to a newer system that has an
    >>80-pin IDE cable.

    >>The existing slave connector is out of reach of the caddy. Is it just
    >>a simple matter to remove and reposition this connector? I routinely
    >>do this with 40-pin cables by reclamping them in a vice, but I'm not
    >>sure how easy this is to do with finer pitch 80-pin ribbon.
    >
    >It's the same general concept, but with a 3rd (center) row
    >iof insulation displacement pins for the grounds. The
    >problem is that it becomes much more precision oriented,
    >fiddly to get them all lined up perfectly. It's far easier
    >to do to a 40 conductor cable so if you had a spare
    >40-conductor cable and didn't need 80 conductor (for the
    >master device?) then you might just use one instead.

    The caddy will be a primary slave, so the cable will need to be
    80-pin. I'm not sure if I can buy a ready made cable with the
    connectors in reachable positions, but I'll see what I can find at the
    next market. Thanks.


    - Franc Zabkar
    --
    Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:47:16 +1000, Franc Zabkar
    <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote:

    >On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 23:05:10 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> put finger to
    >keyboard and composed:
    >
    >>On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 08:14:07 +1000, Franc Zabkar
    >><fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote:
    >>
    >>>I'd like to add an old hard disc caddy to a newer system that has an
    >>>80-pin IDE cable.
    >
    >>>The existing slave connector is out of reach of the caddy. Is it just
    >>>a simple matter to remove and reposition this connector? I routinely
    >>>do this with 40-pin cables by reclamping them in a vice, but I'm not
    >>>sure how easy this is to do with finer pitch 80-pin ribbon.
    >>
    >>It's the same general concept, but with a 3rd (center) row
    >>iof insulation displacement pins for the grounds. The
    >>problem is that it becomes much more precision oriented,
    >>fiddly to get them all lined up perfectly. It's far easier
    >>to do to a 40 conductor cable so if you had a spare
    >>40-conductor cable and didn't need 80 conductor (for the
    >>master device?) then you might just use one instead.
    >
    >The caddy will be a primary slave, so the cable will need to be
    >80-pin. I'm not sure if I can buy a ready made cable with the
    >connectors in reachable positions, but I'll see what I can find at the
    >next market. Thanks.
    >
    I'm pretty sure, from my own setup that's practically the same, that
    the use of the 40 strand cable in the caddy will knock back the speed
    to the lowest common denominator on the ide cable.
    A simple hard drive throughput test utility will show you if this is
    happening.
    I ended up putting my caddy on the secondary ide line, setting the
    removable drives to masters and putting an extended partition on them
    so as to have them show as the last partition on the system.

    Might be worth splashing out on an ATA66+ compatible caddy - they pop
    up on ebay for less than a tenner.

    Regards,


    --
    Stephen Howard - Woodwind repairs & period restorations
    www.shwoodwind.co.uk
    Emails to: showard{whoisat}shwoodwind{dot}co{dot}uk
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:49:39 +0100, Stephen Howard
    <seesigfor@email.uk> wrote:


    >>
    >I'm pretty sure, from my own setup that's practically the same, that
    >the use of the 40 strand cable in the caddy will knock back the speed
    >to the lowest common denominator on the ide cable.
    >A simple hard drive throughput test utility will show you if this is
    >happening.
    >I ended up putting my caddy on the secondary ide line, setting the
    >removable drives to masters and putting an extended partition on them
    >so as to have them show as the last partition on the system.
    >
    >Might be worth splashing out on an ATA66+ compatible caddy - they pop
    >up on ebay for less than a tenner.

    Not an issue at the moment as his old drive would be ATA33
    at most.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:47:58 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:

    >On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:49:39 +0100, Stephen Howard
    ><seesigfor@email.uk> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>
    >>I'm pretty sure, from my own setup that's practically the same, that
    >>the use of the 40 strand cable in the caddy will knock back the speed
    >>to the lowest common denominator on the ide cable.
    >>A simple hard drive throughput test utility will show you if this is
    >>happening.
    >>I ended up putting my caddy on the secondary ide line, setting the
    >>removable drives to masters and putting an extended partition on them
    >>so as to have them show as the last partition on the system.
    >>
    >>Might be worth splashing out on an ATA66+ compatible caddy - they pop
    >>up on ebay for less than a tenner.
    >
    >Not an issue at the moment as his old drive would be ATA33
    >at most.

    It's an issue if the primary master is of better spec - both drives
    would default to the lowest speed.
    Obviously this isn't a problem if the caddy is only connected for
    backing up - but I find I tend to pop it in first thing and remove it
    on shutdown, which means it's active all day.

    Another consideration might be whether, in spite of having an ATA66+
    compatible caddy, the fitting of a sub ATA66 drive would lower the
    default IDE setting.

    Regards,


    --
    Stephen Howard - Woodwind repairs & period restorations
    www.shwoodwind.co.uk
    Emails to: showard{whoisat}shwoodwind{dot}co{dot}uk
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 14:29:44 +0100, Stephen Howard
    <seesigfor@email.uk> wrote:


    >>>Might be worth splashing out on an ATA66+ compatible caddy - they pop
    >>>up on ebay for less than a tenner.
    >>
    >>Not an issue at the moment as his old drive would be ATA33
    >>at most.
    >
    >It's an issue if the primary master is of better spec - both drives
    >would default to the lowest speed.

    They will not default to a lower speed from this situation.
    The drive in the caddy is forced by it's own technology to
    run in ATA33 mode, but the motherboard itself senses the
    cable to determine if 80 conductor. It should not matter
    than the caddy has only 40 conductor internally.


    >Obviously this isn't a problem if the caddy is only connected for
    >backing up - but I find I tend to pop it in first thing and remove it
    >on shutdown, which means it's active all day.
    >
    >Another consideration might be whether, in spite of having an ATA66+
    >compatible caddy, the fitting of a sub ATA66 drive would lower the
    >default IDE setting.

    No, each drive would operate at the maximum speed supported
    by the IDE controller. The IDE setting is not lowered by
    these things, only by whether the 80 conductor cable is
    plugged into the board, what the drive reports it's cable of
    and the max the board itself supports. Within these
    boundaries, the drives can operate at different ATA speeds.
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:39:12 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:

    >On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 14:29:44 +0100, Stephen Howard
    ><seesigfor@email.uk> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>>Might be worth splashing out on an ATA66+ compatible caddy - they pop
    >>>>up on ebay for less than a tenner.
    >>>
    >>>Not an issue at the moment as his old drive would be ATA33
    >>>at most.
    >>
    >>It's an issue if the primary master is of better spec - both drives
    >>would default to the lowest speed.
    >
    >They will not default to a lower speed from this situation.
    >The drive in the caddy is forced by it's own technology to
    >run in ATA33 mode, but the motherboard itself senses the
    >cable to determine if 80 conductor. It should not matter
    >than the caddy has only 40 conductor internally.
    >
    >
    >>Obviously this isn't a problem if the caddy is only connected for
    >>backing up - but I find I tend to pop it in first thing and remove it
    >>on shutdown, which means it's active all day.
    >>
    >>Another consideration might be whether, in spite of having an ATA66+
    >>compatible caddy, the fitting of a sub ATA66 drive would lower the
    >>default IDE setting.
    >
    >No, each drive would operate at the maximum speed supported
    >by the IDE controller. The IDE setting is not lowered by
    >these things, only by whether the 80 conductor cable is
    >plugged into the board, what the drive reports it's cable of
    >and the max the board itself supports. Within these
    >boundaries, the drives can operate at different ATA speeds.

    Thanks for the clarification.

    It just occurred to me - you can't always fit a sub ATA66 caddy to an
    80 strand cable, the cable usually has a pin blanked out, and the
    caddy connector is fully populated.
    I think the OP might have to use the secondary ide channel with a 40
    strand cable, or buy a faster spec'd caddy.

    Regards,


    --
    Stephen Howard - Woodwind repairs & period restorations
    www.shwoodwind.co.uk
    Emails to: showard{whoisat}shwoodwind{dot}co{dot}uk
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 15:18:09 +0100, Stephen Howard
    <seesigfor@email.uk> wrote:


    >It just occurred to me - you can't always fit a sub ATA66 caddy to an
    >80 strand cable, the cable usually has a pin blanked out, and the
    >caddy connector is fully populated.
    >I think the OP might have to use the secondary ide channel with a 40
    >strand cable, or buy a faster spec'd caddy.

    OEM systems like Dells' often used a blanked cable, back in
    the ATA33 days... typical solution is use a very fine drill
    bit or heated needle to pierce the blanked pin- it's not
    solid all the way through, usually, just a thin top
    covering... or rip the pin out of the enclusure but that
    seems like slightly higher risk of being problematic.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:47:58 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> put finger to
    keyboard and composed:

    >On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:49:39 +0100, Stephen Howard
    ><seesigfor@email.uk> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>
    >>I'm pretty sure, from my own setup that's practically the same, that
    >>the use of the 40 strand cable in the caddy will knock back the speed
    >>to the lowest common denominator on the ide cable.
    >>A simple hard drive throughput test utility will show you if this is
    >>happening.
    >>I ended up putting my caddy on the secondary ide line, setting the
    >>removable drives to masters and putting an extended partition on them
    >>so as to have them show as the last partition on the system.
    >>
    >>Might be worth splashing out on an ATA66+ compatible caddy - they pop
    >>up on ebay for less than a tenner.
    >
    >Not an issue at the moment as his old drive would be ATA33
    >at most.

    Sorry, I should have given more details. My old 40-pin system is a
    socket 7 setup with ATA33 IDE. My new system is an Athlon XP 2500+
    with 80-pin UDMA133. I wish to exchange data between the two.

    One of the reasons for my concern is that the caddy, with its short
    internal cable, will look like an unterminated stub whenever the drive
    is removed.


    - Franc Zabkar
    --
    Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:49:30 +1000, Franc Zabkar
    <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote:


    >>Not an issue at the moment as his old drive would be ATA33
    >>at most.
    >
    >Sorry, I should have given more details. My old 40-pin system is a
    >socket 7 setup with ATA33 IDE. My new system is an Athlon XP 2500+
    >with 80-pin UDMA133. I wish to exchange data between the two.

    OK, what I was getting at was the method of transportation-
    the intent to use an old
    1.2GB HDD, means it would be ATA33 capable at most.


    >
    >One of the reasons for my concern is that the caddy, with its short
    >internal cable, will look like an unterminated stub whenever the drive
    >is removed.

    So this cable remains in the system when the caddy is
    removed, rather than the cable being inside the removable
    portion? If so, that is a potential issue but given that
    it's short I would expect it to still work. After all,
    plenty of people have used cables with only the middle
    connector occupied, leaving the end floating.
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:49:30 +1000, Franc Zabkar
    <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote:

    >On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:47:58 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> put finger to
    >keyboard and composed:
    >
    >>On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:49:39 +0100, Stephen Howard
    >><seesigfor@email.uk> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>>
    >>>I'm pretty sure, from my own setup that's practically the same, that
    >>>the use of the 40 strand cable in the caddy will knock back the speed
    >>>to the lowest common denominator on the ide cable.
    >>>A simple hard drive throughput test utility will show you if this is
    >>>happening.
    >>>I ended up putting my caddy on the secondary ide line, setting the
    >>>removable drives to masters and putting an extended partition on them
    >>>so as to have them show as the last partition on the system.
    >>>
    >>>Might be worth splashing out on an ATA66+ compatible caddy - they pop
    >>>up on ebay for less than a tenner.
    >>
    >>Not an issue at the moment as his old drive would be ATA33
    >>at most.
    >
    >Sorry, I should have given more details. My old 40-pin system is a
    >socket 7 setup with ATA33 IDE. My new system is an Athlon XP 2500+
    >with 80-pin UDMA133. I wish to exchange data between the two.
    >
    >One of the reasons for my concern is that the caddy, with its short
    >internal cable, will look like an unterminated stub whenever the drive
    >is removed.
    >
    It won't matter at all.

    Regards,


    --
    Stephen Howard - Woodwind repairs & period restorations
    www.shwoodwind.co.uk
    Emails to: showard{whoisat}shwoodwind{dot}co{dot}uk
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    "Stephen Howard" <seesigfor@email.uk> wrote in message
    news:hu7gb1tg65n6v2b02o10sci8qge2h31fki@4ax.com...

    > Stephen Howard - {snip} & period restorations

    My wife had a hysterectomy. Can you help?
    MUHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

    I don't know what you guys across the big pond call a
    women's period, but it sure is ... as you would say:
    a bloody mess !!!! MUHAHAHAHAHAHA

    (GARY! Stop yourself)
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 03:54:48 GMT, "Gary C"
    <Clem_Kadiddlehopper@Crazy_Googinheimer.com> wrote:

    >
    >"Stephen Howard" <seesigfor@email.uk> wrote in message
    >news:hu7gb1tg65n6v2b02o10sci8qge2h31fki@4ax.com...
    >
    >> Stephen Howard - {snip} & period restorations
    >
    >My wife had a hysterectomy. Can you help?

    Sure....I can do you a matching vasectomy. I'll go find a chisel...

    >MUHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
    >
    >I don't know what you guys across the big pond call a
    >women's period, but it sure is ... as you would say:
    >a bloody mess !!!! MUHAHAHAHAHAHA
    >
    >(GARY! Stop yourself)
    >


    --
    Stephen Howard - Woodwind repairs & period restorations
    www.shwoodwind.co.uk
    Emails to: showard{whoisat}shwoodwind{dot}co{dot}uk
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:18:16 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> put finger to
    keyboard and composed:

    >On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:49:30 +1000, Franc Zabkar
    ><fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>Not an issue at the moment as his old drive would be ATA33
    >>>at most.
    >>
    >>Sorry, I should have given more details. My old 40-pin system is a
    >>socket 7 setup with ATA33 IDE. My new system is an Athlon XP 2500+
    >>with 80-pin UDMA133. I wish to exchange data between the two.
    >
    >OK, what I was getting at was the method of transportation-
    >the intent to use an old
    >1.2GB HDD, means it would be ATA33 capable at most.
    >
    >
    >
    >>
    >>One of the reasons for my concern is that the caddy, with its short
    >>internal cable, will look like an unterminated stub whenever the drive
    >>is removed.
    >
    >So this cable remains in the system when the caddy is
    >removed, rather than the cable being inside the removable
    >portion?

    The cable is indeed in the caddy. What remains in the system is a stub
    consisting of a 3cm PCB. My problem is that the two caddies are of
    different brands and therefore not interchangeable. This means I would
    need to remove the HD from one caddy and install it in the other. I
    had intended to leave the empty caddy in its machine so as not to lose
    it.

    >If so, that is a potential issue but given that
    >it's short I would expect it to still work. After all,
    >plenty of people have used cables with only the middle
    >connector occupied, leaving the end floating.

    I was under the impression that this causes undesirable reflections.
    Do you know of any torture test that can measure hard disc error
    rates?


    - Franc Zabkar
    --
    Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 08:11:42 +1000, Franc Zabkar
    <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote:


    >>If so, that is a potential issue but given that
    >>it's short I would expect it to still work. After all,
    >>plenty of people have used cables with only the middle
    >>connector occupied, leaving the end floating.
    >
    >I was under the impression that this causes undesirable reflections.
    >Do you know of any torture test that can measure hard disc error
    >rates?

    It may be undesirable yet people have used their systems for
    years like this, and they benchmarked ok. I don't recall
    anything that would report the data resends, which would be
    what happens if the errors occur. You might simply
    benchmark with and without the caddy to see if there's any
    difference in scores.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On 2005-06-23, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
    > On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 08:11:42 +1000, Franc Zabkar
    ><fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote:
    >
    >>I was under the impression that this causes undesirable reflections.
    >>Do you know of any torture test that can measure hard disc error
    >>rates?
    >
    > It may be undesirable yet people have used their systems for
    > years like this, and they benchmarked ok. I don't recall
    > anything that would report the data resends, which would be
    > what happens if the errors occur. You might simply
    > benchmark with and without the caddy to see if there's any
    > difference in scores.

    I seem to recall a MASM listing from at least a decade ago that would
    monitor this (for a different reason - when drives weren't as
    reliable as they are nowadays) - I think I know which book I read it in
    and it's still on my bookshelf. You'd have to boot to DOS (or possibly
    safe mode on 95/98/ME) for it to work but should still be able to tell
    you if anything untoward is happening. I'll see if I can dig it out.

    In any case, the fact that it's worked well in the past doesn't mean
    that it will carry on that way - with each new faster disk standard the
    cabling becomes more and more critical - witness the price of the latest,
    fastest SCSI cables for an illustration of this.

    --
    Andrew Smallshaw
    andrews@sdf.lonestar.org
Ask a new question

Read More

Homebuilt Cable Systems Product