Oh no my WD1200JB is dying

MJOMJO Denmark New
edited January 2005 in Hardware
Oh dear, here we go again.

Earlier tonight my WD1200JB made a strange sound.
I decided to test it with WD Data Lifeguard tool.

It reports an error, but what does it mean?
Here's the error code:
Test Result: FAIL
Test Error Code: 08-

I cannot find that on WD's website?

Note: The drive is connected with the SATA -> PATA converter, but that shouldn't be a problem, right?

BTW: What 200 GB harddrive would you guys recommend?
It needs to be stable, fast and not too expensive.
And right now I am testing my WD800JB as well.

Comments

  • TexTex Dallas/Ft. Worth
    edited January 2005
    replace the cable and converter and test again.

    Asking guys what drive is best is like asking what color hair is best on a babe. Everyone has a favorite.

    I tend to of had amazing luck in the last few years with the fluid bearing Maxtors. Others will swear Seagate or Hitachi and others like the WD's.

    Personally the only WD I would buy is a raptor.

    Tex
  • MJOMJO Denmark New
    edited January 2005
    Tex wrote:
    replace the cable and converter and test again.

    Asking guys what drive is best is like asking what color hair is best on a babe. Everyone has a favorite.

    I tend to of had amazing luck in the last few years with the fluid bearing Maxtors. Others will swear Seagate or Hitachi and others like the WD's.

    Personally the only WD I would buy is a raptor.

    Tex

    I have no other converter/cable, but I could try moving it to the regular ide port.
    I will have to take my old IBM out though.
    Right now I am backing up, only 60 GB left. ;D
    Note I am backing up on DVD's

    I know it is hard to recommend a harddrive, that is why I usually look at storagereview.com before I make my purchase. ;)

    Possible 200 GB replacements:
    Western Digital Caviar SE WD2000JD SATA
    Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 Plus SATA
    Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 9 SATA
    Maxtor DiamondMax 10 SATA

    What would be the better choice?
  • GobblesGobbles Ventura California
    edited January 2005
    I got a used pata WD 200 gig jb, work was canning a bunch of 200 and 180 gig drives so I snagged a few. So far its working fine. XP loads pretty fast on it.

    However like tex I have to agree on the maxtors. We use 250gig pata drives at work. We use the maxline 2's rated for a million hours operation. Gotta pretty good failure rate. probably 10 outta 500.
  • MJOMJO Denmark New
    edited January 2005
    I am very close to buying the Western Digital Caviar SE WD2000JD SATA.

    It wasn't all that expensive, and the couple of reviews I've read seemed positive.

    Any comments anyone?
  • gtghmgtghm New
    edited January 2005
    I have had one of my 100gb JB drives fail along with the replacement. I am on my third drive, so far all is good... But I have 4 other WD drives that have lasted and are working just fine.... Knocks on wood.... :)

    However, being a JB drive it should be under warranty, 3 years is what you get I beleive... If so, you should be able to get enterprise replacement, meaning you should be able to supply a CC number and get the drive RMA'ed and replacement shipped to you first then ship the bad drive back. They will charge your CC until they get the bad drive back and then remove the charge on the CC.

    All you should have to do is put that code in for the RMA. If you don't know if the drive is under warranty or not all you gotta do is type in the drive serial number in at the WD site and it will tell you if the drive is warranted or not.

    Other than that, WD seems to be as good a company as any drive manufacture.
    Their drives fail just like the others do....

    "g"
  • MJOMJO Denmark New
    edited January 2005
    gtghm wrote:
    I have had one of my 100gb JB drives fail along with the replacement. I am on my third drive, so far all is good... But I have 4 other WD drives that have lasted and are working just fine.... Knocks on wood.... :)

    However, being a JB drive it should be under warranty, 3 years is what you get I beleive... If so, you should be able to get enterprise replacement, meaning you should be able to supply a CC number and get the drive RMA'ed and replacement shipped to you first then ship the bad drive back. They will charge your CC until they get the bad drive back and then remove the charge on the CC.

    All you should have to do is put that code in for the RMA. If you don't know if the drive is under warranty or not all you gotta do is type in the drive serial number in at the WD site and it will tell you if the drive is warranted or not.

    Other than that, WD seems to be as good a company as any drive manufacture.
    Their drives fail just like the others do....

    "g"

    Yes it should be under warranty, but I cannot live with only an 80 GB disc, oh and an old 10 GB IBM. (Until I receive my replacement)
    I was going to purchase some more harddrive space after all. ;)

    Your final comment is very comforting indeed. ;D

    BTW: The Maxtor DiamondMax 10 with NCQ, looks interesting as well.
    And it is a bit cheaper than the 2000JD.
    Oh man I can't decide. :scratch:
  • test_tube_tonytest_tube_tony Dallas TX Member
    edited January 2005
    from past experience i never trust maxtor. i've had 6 maxtors die(4 of em developed an excessive amount of bad sectors), and my uncle has had 3 die. they may have gotten better in the last couple years tho. i have never had a segate die, and only 1 WD die (the motor toasted).
  • MJOMJO Denmark New
    edited January 2005
    test_tube_tony wrote:
    from past experience i never trust maxtor. i've had 6 maxtors die(4 of em developed an excessive amount of bad sectors), and my uncle has had 3 die. they may have gotten better in the last couple years tho. i have never had a segate die, and only 1 WD die (the motor toasted).

    I am not all that thrilled about Maxtor either.
    But the DM10 has native SATA and NCQ.
    The WD's do not have such features. :shakehead
  • MJOMJO Denmark New
    edited January 2005
    I bought the WD2000JD, but maybe I will buy a DM10 next month.
    I am curious, I haven't used Maxtor for years.
  • MJOMJO Denmark New
    edited January 2005
    I have now recevied my WD2000JD.
    Productiondate = december 18th 2004, so it is quite fresh. :thumbsup:

    I'm going to install it later tonight.

    EDIT: Tex it didn't help putting it on a regular IDE connector.
    It produces the excact same error codes.
    So it is going for an RMA after all.
  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited January 2005
    MJO wrote:
    Oh dear, here we go again.

    Earlier tonight my WD1200JB made a strange sound.
    I decided to test it with WD Data Lifeguard tool.

    It reports an error, but what does it mean?
    Here's the error code:
    Test Result: FAIL
    Test Error Code: 08-

    I cannot find that on WD's website?

    The error is best reported directly to Western Digital tech support. Thier tool reporting fail should get you someone from engineering on the phone line or via email for tech support, that is the most likely outcome, and if you use the version 11 tools and still get errors report those only if you used an earlier v ersion for this test run. Some older tools report errors on drives that are bigger than they were designed to handle, also.

    Also be aware you need version 11 of the tools and diags to get codes right for SATA in some cases.
  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited January 2005
    MJO wrote:
    I am very close to buying the Western Digital Caviar SE WD2000JD SATA.

    It wasn't all that expensive, and the couple of reviews I've read seemed positive.

    Any comments anyone?

    The 100's are not second gen SATA, the 200 IS run by a later controller firmware rev and is basicly WD's second gen of firmware for thier JB drives.


    So, to MJO I would say that the 200 is less likely to fail than the 120 was, the 160's are available with first and second gen controller firmware (as sizes, each one can have either but not both as far as invidiual drives go). AFAIK, the 120's are mostly if not all gen 1 firmware-- this is not relected in pure firmware rev numbering, but 200's fail less that 100's, 120's, and 160's. 100's and 120's are earlier large HD models, adn the bugs had not been fully worked out.


    Thoss of you with HD problems might also, when you replace a drive, NOT put it above a CD Burner or DVD burner, most heat from those goes UPWARD in cases of mini, mid-, and full towers. So, HD should be physically lower that a burner in tower computer designs. If you burn a lot, and have drive above the burner, it will get heated on its controller min i-card embedded as part of drive with excess heat from burner, and OH faster. Not saying anyone HAS done this, not pointing fingers, simply saying this is one place not to put a HD if you want a full lifespan from it.
  • MJOMJO Denmark New
    edited January 2005
    Straight_Man wrote:
    The error is best reported directly to Western Digital tech support. Thier tool reporting fail should get you someone from engineering on the phone line or via email for tech support, that is the most likely outcome, and if you use the version 11 tools and still get errors report those only if you used an earlier v ersion for this test run. Some older tools report errors on drives that are bigger than they were designed to handle, also.

    Also be aware you need version 11 of the tools and diags to get codes right for SATA in some cases.

    I've have made an RMA, now I just need to ship the drive to Germany.
    (Yes when you live in Denmark, the drive goes to Germany ;) )
    Straight_Man wrote:
    The 100's are not second gen SATA, the 200 IS run by a later controller firmware rev and is basicly WD's second gen of firmware for thier JB drives.


    So, to MJO I would say that the 200 is less likely to fail than the 120 was, the 160's are available with first and second gen controller firmware (as sizes, each one can have either but not both as far as invidiual drives go). AFAIK, the 120's are mostly if not all gen 1 firmware-- this is not relected in pure firmware rev numbering, but 200's fail less that 100's, 120's, and 160's. 100's and 120's are earlier large HD models, adn the bugs had not been fully worked out.


    Thoss of you with HD problems might also, when you replace a drive, NOT put it above a CD Burner or DVD burner, most heat from those goes UPWARD in cases of mini, mid-, and full towers. So, HD should be physically lower that a burner in tower computer designs. If you burn a lot, and have drive above the burner, it will get heated on its controller min i-card embedded as part of drive with excess heat from burner, and OH faster. Not saying anyone HAS done this, not pointing fingers, simply saying this is one place not to put a HD if you want a full lifespan from it.

    Thanks for the information.
    Note: I have a WD800JB running just fine, and that is a bit older than the soon to be dead WD1200JB.

    Actually the drive was placed above the PSU (in the top of the case), not ideal but I couldn't fit it anywhere else.
  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited January 2005
    80 GB drives were the best of the small size drives. Over 100 GB requires tighter spacing of data tracks on media if the media is same size and same number of platters and heads are used. The 80 GB drives are actually two platter, four head in the drive you are talking about. When WD, Maxtor, Seagate, Hitachi, and others tried to break the 100 GB barrier they ran into needs for design changes in platter density-- lots of this included firmware changes. Some mfrs, including WD, tried to make a single platter 100 GB, and single platter 120 also. By the time the 200 GB drives came around to market, the higher density mfring kinks had mostly been worked out.
  • TexTex Dallas/Ft. Worth
    edited January 2005
    Straight_Man wrote:
    Thoss of you with HD problems might also, when you replace a drive, NOT put it above a CD Burner or DVD burner, most heat from those goes UPWARD in cases of mini, mid-, and full towers. So, HD should be physically lower that a burner in tower computer designs. If you burn a lot, and have drive above the burner, it will get heated on its controller min i-card embedded as part of drive with excess heat from burner, and OH faster. Not saying anyone HAS done this, not pointing fingers, simply saying this is one place not to put a HD if you want a full lifespan from it.

    I think in most cases mounting one close to a cdrom or dvd creates problems not from heat but from the vibration caused by many cdroms when they spin up or down. So many of the new cases are aluminum and very flimsy and e
    the vibrations is enough to cause probs with heads skipping over the disk surface on the drive.

    Tex
  • ShivianShivian Australia
    edited January 2005
    MJO wrote:
    I am very close to buying the Western Digital Caviar SE WD2000JD SATA.

    It wasn't all that expensive, and the couple of reviews I've read seemed positive.

    Any comments anyone?
    I use the WD Caviar 200GB PATA drives atm and had several 120GB Caviars that I haven't heard a peep out of. Guess it is luck of the draw for anything other than a deathstar :p
  • MJOMJO Denmark New
    edited January 2005
    Tex wrote:
    I think in most cases mounting one close to a cdrom or dvd creates problems not from heat but from the vibration caused by many cdroms when they spin up or down. So many of the new cases are aluminum and very flimsy and e
    the vibrations is enough to cause probs with heads skipping over the disk surface on the drive.

    Tex

    Note: My case is made of steel, no flimsy aluminum for me. ;D
    It is the "ancient?" Aopen HQ08 :D

    EDIT: WD's diagnostic tool reports no errors today.
    I am going to send it for RMA anyway, I tested the drive thoroughly yesterday and the day before that.
    Every test produced the same error, so this is probably just a fluke.
  • MJOMJO Denmark New
    edited January 2005
    I almost forgot.
    Here are the the benches I've made with my new drive.
    Doesn't look too bad. ;D
Sign In or Register to comment.