5000AAKS Vs 5000KS - RMA issues!

[V12V12]

I unfortunately just lost EVERYTHING! 2 HD's crashed, including my backup 500GB 5000AAKS.... *Click click click* out of the blue

So I noticed during the whole RMA process that the drive they (WD) is shipping is a 5000KS model Vs the AAKS I RMA'd. I've seen a few forums noting that the major diffs are the AAKS uses one fewer platter (160GB density) Vs the KS using 1 more and 133GB density. Also many posters reported the KS is louder and produces more heat. Having noted the platter issue that would make the KS slower also....

So after 7 emails of canned responses to my inquiry about W.TF am I being sent a different model than I ordered, I made the CALL: basically the disgruntled tier 1 told me that the ONLY diff is the KS has legacy molex power connection support. "They both have the same platter number, density, blah blah sir..." Okay fine no help there either, so I will post a few questionable links stating otherwise:

1) The 1st and most disturbing:
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q148 ... AKS-wb.png

2) Note the complete diff case design
http://img514.imageshack.us/my.php?imag ... sksod5.jpg


3) Lastly the design/temp discussion
viewtopic.php?p=336384&sid=e09c1980adc9 ... 289700dd7c

So what do you guys think - am I getting ripped, and should call up after I do some homebrew testing of my own (HD tach, etc.)?

I was on the phone with a tier 1 about it and he was getting pretty huffy about how they are the same model blah blah - and I ask then why the diffs in the drive's physical appearance, why is the PCB diff - IF they are the same drive aside from a power interface: Molex + Sata Vs Sata... It would cost too much money to retool a whole new casing and PCB IF the drives were identical just for an adapter... again he said the drives are THE SAME just the power interface is diff... Should I bother even HD-taching to see if there's a diff, or when I get the drive, immediately call up and ask to speak with a manager about getting pushed into accepting a DIFF drive than what I purchased, regardless of similarities?

If I wanted to sell these on ebay, people would immediate ask questions about W.TF are they listed as diff models etc... So I'm not buying this switcheroo either!

[whiic]

They really are diffent in many ways:
4 platters -> 3 platters
125GB/platter -> 167GB/platter
big PCB + molex -> small PCB, no molex
different casing
different top cover
contact start/stop (CSS) => load/unload (LUL)

Both are based on longitudal recording but not much else is in common. Especially changing to LUL was a one-time transition and first time WD has used it in desktop sized HDDs. (IBM/Hitachi has used LUL since 75GXP. Seagate and Samsung still don't use it in desktop sized HDDs, but only in laptop drives.)

[V12V12]

They really are diffent in many ways:
4 platters -> 3 platters
125GB/platter -> 167GB/platter
big PCB + molex -> small PCB, no molex
different casing
different top cover
contact start/stop (CSS) => load/unload (LUL)

Both are based on longitudal recording but not much else is in common. Especially changing to LUL was a one-time transition and first time WD has used it in desktop sized HDDs. (IBM/Hitachi has used LUL since 75GXP. Seagate and Samsung still don't use it in desktop sized HDDs, but only in laptop drives.)

HEY! GOt a bite finally! THanks!

Why that lying POS! THe guy basically yadda'd me off the phone - "sir they ARE THE SAME - SAME platters, same blah blah..." I do NOT like being lied to! Wow... so any opinions on the best way of going about this - I just received the drive today, but haven't picked it up yet... if it's a KS indeed, then I'm refusing it and telling them to ship me what I Paid for originally, not some old antiquated model they are trying to clear inventory of! This is ridiculous - I would border on claiming FRAUD.
Since the replacement is nothing at all like the model I got - it's a switcher-roo in which if I tried returning a KS drive at a retail store for the AAKS I bought, they'd throw the book at me and call the cops!

[V12V12]

SoB.... okay I just received my drive and it indeed is a 5000KS and the packaging wasn't anything but the standard plastic HD holders + anti-static bag... I'm not sure if that's okay or not. Anyhow I am going to have to resend this back. But here is my question that I NEED to have answered for sure...

Is there definitive PROOF that the KS is different from the AAKS: I have a feeling I'm going to run into serious opposition about returning this and get force-fed more lies about how they are the same drive yap yap... If someone could please provide where you're getting these claims from, that would greatly help my case for getting the drive I originally paid for...

THanks!

[whiic]

"Is there definitive PROOF that the KS is different from the AAKS"

http://www.wdc.com/en/library/sata/2879-001144.pdf

That's the 5000AAKS specs sheet. Ironically 5000KS also links there, even though it's not relevant to 5000KS.

That SecurePark (=LUL) wasn't around when 5000KS was introduced.

It's funny, btw, that WD's SATA drives spin at 7143rpm while PATA variants spin at 5455rpm, yet both are claimed to rotate at 7200rpm.
How did I get these numbers? From average latency. Average latency is the time it takes for platters to spin a half revolution. Thus rpm can be calculated as follows:
1/(L/1000)*60/2, where L is latency (in milliseconds)
or in simpler form just 30000/L

SATA's latency is 4.2ms according to WD's specs.
PATA's latency is 5.5ms according to WD's specs.

I wonder if they keep a legion of monkeys working for WD that create these specs sheets. This same BS about differing latencies between SATA and PATA has been going for many years and yet no-one fixes it, even when they publish a brand new specs sheet for a new line of drives. They just copy-paste every friggin' line they dare. Totally worthless... those sheets are most useful when printed to soft toilet paper. I wonder if any printer can actually print on toilet paper. Can they?

Sorry about the rant. I rant too much about WD's annoying naming scheme and substandard and utterly useless specs. Their drives are OK but why-oh-why can't they invest a little bit of time to actually keep the public documentation accurate.

[Nick Geraedts]

It's funny, btw, that WD's SATA drives spin at 7143rpm while PATA variants spin at 5455rpm, yet both are claimed to rotate at 7200rpm.
How did I get these numbers? From average latency. Average latency is the time it takes for platters to spin a half revolution. Thus rpm can be calculated as follows:
1/(L/1000)*60/2, where L is latency (in milliseconds)
or in simpler form just 30000/L

SATA's latency is 4.2ms according to WD's specs.
PATA's latency is 5.5ms according to WD's specs.

Err... latency has more to do than just rotational speed. There's far more latency in the connection of PATA than there is with SATA. This comes from the fact that PATA controllers run at a far lower frequency than SATA controllers do.

[V12V12]

Okay I sent them another email requesting as before and to stop playing games... this is just completely unacceptable wow....

[johnnky1]

v12v12
I dont know whether or not you've had any luck with WD
but if you are interested, i just bought a aaks, and it wont work with my mother board because I have a piece of shit that doesnt support that type
power cable
if you can think of a safe way of switching, I would be more than happy
to give you aaks

[V12V12]

Well today I received my updated RMA after 7+ emails calmly pointing out the know differences, performance compros, and the issue of fraud and general bad business practice and losing customers: And it PAID off... sorta. I did get a 5000AAKS = Recertified, but I guess it's better than a slow poke Recert'd 5000KS!

I'm still debating whether or not I should take this to the major review sites: I'm betting MANY people do not know about this and would like to be informed before they purchase a WD HD....?