On June 19, Andy Ball wrote:
>   DM> If memory serves (and I'm pretty sure it does in this case) the RD32 was a
>     > Seagate ST251, not an ST251-1.  Not that there's THAT much difference
>     > (40ms vs. 28ms)..
> 
> I don't know which the RD32 was, but I've a recollection that the 'physical
> geometry' was different between the ST251 and ST251-1 as well as the speed.
> Sadly I don't have the relevent notes any more.

  I'm Pretty Darn Sure the geometries were the same between the ST251
and the ST251-1.  In fact I've used them interchangeably in MicroVAX
systems.  The idea of replacing an ST251 with an ST251-1 to increase
performance was an old trick that circulated around my local gang of
DECheads about 12 years ago.

       -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire                  "Needing a calculator indicates that
St. Petersburg, FL              your .emacs file is incomplete." -Joshua Boyd