JIM HOLSONBACK wrote in a message to ROY J. TELLASON:

 JH> Hello, Roy.

 JH> Awhile back, we were talking here about your problem HDD.  I've
 JH> been meaning to write you about this, but waited long, and now I
 JH> can't find the old msgs.  Part of my delay was that I wanted to do
 JH> some research, but that is still aways off for me due to other
 JH> obligations, and I want to go ahead and at least get the subject
 JH> out there for discussion and maybe someone else can fill us in.

 JH> OK, from memory - - you had reported autodetected CHS for your
 JH> 6.4GB or so HDD.  I looked at those, compared to the CHS reported
 JH> here on this 1.6GB  HDD

CHS?  I seem to recall there being three choices for mode in there, 
"NORMAL",  "LARGE",  and "LBA".  I chose LBA
in all cases,  on pretty much everything here.

 JH> My 1.6GB autodetected at 787/64/63 , and multiplying those by 512
 JH> bytes per sector yields  1.62 GB +/-.  BIR you reported yours had
 JH> autodetected at about the same, except for one of the parameters
 JH> about double mine (probably heads), and at 512 bytes per sector
 JH> that would point to a HDD of about 3.2GB. That is why I had asked
 JH> you whether your HPFS partition may have used 1024 bytes per sector
 JH> for its formatting.

I don't recall now what it was,  and would have to reboot the machine to find out...

 JH> So anyway, I wonder if you have that 6+GB drive attached to a
 JH> mainboard which can properly recognize it.

Yeah,  I believe so.

 JH> In larger sizes, I think the autodetect chs x 512 falls apart, but
 JH> no time right now to look up and cite the reasons I'm saying that. 

 JH> Info contributions eagerly sought.

Let me save this,  reboot,  and I'll look.

---