This is the algorithm I'm using to determine a drive's cluster size based on 
its size:

Rough cluster size is drive size divided by 65536
Convert rough cluster size to binary
Count number of digits in binary number (starting with first '1')
Actual cluster size is 2 raised to the power of the number of digits above

Is there anything wrong with this *other* than it not taking into account the 
12-bit FAT of a <16MB drive?

The reason I ask is because I have a 60MB FAT partition with 2048 byte 
clusters, but according to my reasoning, it should have only 1024 byte 
clusters.

I shrunk it down from 100MB with PartitionMagic (1.0), but I also reformatted
the drive.

Is the cluster size still being affected by what PartitionMagic did, or is my 
algorithm (and hence my understanding of FAT) flawed?

--- RG 10-5 Exp/GE 1.02+