Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Removal of bad sectors marked by CHKDSK

1 view
Skip to first unread message

PCfixinman

unread,
Oct 16, 2004, 1:15:07 PM10/16/04
to
Hi,

I had 2 bad sectors, which were on a Seagate 2.5" HDD...
Using the manufacturers software, I was able to repair these sectors...
I used every other HDD manufacturers HDD software to check this disk, it is
clean, with no bad sectors, not even, those CHKDSK marked...

What do I need to do, to remove these sectors marked as bad, in XP SP2 pro..
DO I need to re-install the OS, or are they hidden somewhere, I can find &
delete them...

They were marked:

$badsect

Any Ideas?

thanks!

PCFM


--
One step closer to the edge...

David H. Lipman

unread,
Oct 16, 2004, 3:28:22 PM10/16/04
to
Do Nothing. The OS should read/write in data areas around those marked bad.
The question is -- will the number of bad sectors increase ?

Dave


"PCfixinman" <PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:08EF6D16-E623-4DB0...@microsoft.com...

PCfixinman

unread,
Oct 16, 2004, 3:49:05 PM10/16/04
to
Hi Dave,

Thanks for the reply... The strange thing, is that the bad sectors were
fixed...Not only do they not show up, in any hdd software utlity, but the
drive no loger is sluggish..

I know if I re-install XP pro, it will report 0 in bad sectors...

Do you know how I can remove what XP marked as bad, to see if it finds them
bad again?

so far, there have been no more goin g bad, I think this is due to those 2
having been fixed...

TIA,

PCFM

davexnet02

unread,
Oct 16, 2004, 4:01:31 PM10/16/04
to
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 12:49:05 -0700, "PCfixinman"
<PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Hi Dave,
>
>Thanks for the reply... The strange thing, is that the bad sectors were
>fixed...Not only do they not show up, in any hdd software utlity, but the
>drive no loger is sluggish..
>
>I know if I re-install XP pro, it will report 0 in bad sectors...
>
>Do you know how I can remove what XP marked as bad, to see if it finds them
>bad again?
>
>so far, there have been no more goin g bad, I think this is due to those 2
>having been fixed...
>
>TIA,
>

There's a legitimate reason for doing this.
I cloned a win2k partition that happened to have 2 bad clusters
marked in the $badclus database.
because the clone tool copied everything as is, the
2 bad sectors showed up in the cloned win2k - purely
as a result of the way it was copied.

Reinstall will get rid of it. The only other solution
I have seen was a Linux utiliy, believe it or not.
It involved creating a bootable linux cdrom.
This linux boots from the CD and that's the system.
No install is done to the harddrive. But once you have that,
you can run a utility to "reset" the bad clusters.
I can't find the details (web page) at the moment, but if you're
interested, I'll look for it.

Dave

Bill James

unread,
Oct 16, 2004, 4:17:51 PM10/16/04
to
Not always, but many times finding a few bad segments is the early sign of a hard drive going bad, and the problem will continue to get worse. As I said, that's not always the case, but if you have any critical data that is not backed up, you should seriously consider archiving that data to off disk storage now. How likely an indicator of pending hard drive failure is it when a few bad segments are found? In my experience, at least 9 out of 10 times the disk will soon fail completely.

--

Bill James
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User

Windows VBScript Utilities » www.billsway.com/vbspage/
Windows Tweaks & Tips » www.billsway.com/notes_public/

"PCfixinman" <PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:9D499017-8639-4FAB...@microsoft.com...

David H. Lipman

unread,
Oct 16, 2004, 5:20:32 PM10/16/04
to
I concur.

Dave

"Bill James" <wgj...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:eB7G007s...@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

PCfixinman

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 1:53:07 AM10/17/04
to
Hi,

So this means, even if the HDD's
MANU drive software, fixed these, bad sectors, 9 out of 10 times the drive
will fail anyway?(btw I did back-up all pertinent data to another HDD in my
network, as well as burned it to a few DVD's..this is a work notebook, & why
would Dell tell me that all drives have areas, set aside for bad sectors as
drive MANu's know they get them easy??? I never heard this before...

I have about 20 HDD's in my self-built desktop tower PC's(mostly WD raptors)
out of all these hdds I bought, not one of them show a bad sector, in 3
years...1 did just fail(a maxtor) after a normal power down...

Would you think Dell is snowing me?

If a utility fixes bad sectors, & this isn't permanent(I see more bad
sectors, or new ones start if I decide to re-install, I wll get Dell to
replace it...What bums me out is this notebook, isn't even 3 months old, &
dell acts like all HDD's have bad sectors claiming "It is part of the drive
manufacturering process..which I think is bull..

I do alot of hardware replacement, mostly DDR, vid cards, CPUs, & an
ocasional HDD
as well as build systems...

Thanks gents!

Dave could you look for that Linux program, you told me about?

Much appreciated advice!!!

Bill James

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 2:19:47 AM10/17/04
to
All that the drive utilities are telling you is that there are currently no bad sectors, except for those already blocked out, and response time, etc. are within tolerance. Typically it's deterioration of the disk surface that causes drives to fail, and that process accelerates as more and more as the surface starts shedding. Yes, there are a certain number of bad segments on a new drive, but the initial check at time of manufacturing should mark and hide all of those. If the problems you found were on the first chkdsk ever run on the drive soon after purchase, I guess it's possible they were just missed in the q.a. process and damage may not go any further.

Good luck, and watch that warrantee period -- they are shorter than they used to be.

--

Bill James
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User

Windows VBScript Utilities » www.billsway.com/vbspage/
Windows Tweaks & Tips » www.billsway.com/notes_public/

"PCfixinman" <PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:0A4DD758-CBA5-484E...@microsoft.com...

Alex Nichol

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 7:54:17 AM10/17/04
to
PCfixinman wrote:

>
>Thanks for the reply... The strange thing, is that the bad sectors were
>fixed...Not only do they not show up, in any hdd software utlity, but the
>drive no loger is sluggish..
>
>I know if I re-install XP pro, it will report 0 in bad sectors...

What is reporting them as bad now? When bad sectors are so marked it is
normally right down in a record on the disk for its own electronics to
know about, and if the maker's software fixed the sectors it will have
fixed these markers too - or more likely provided alternates which are
picked up automatically and invisible to the OS

--
Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
Bournemouth, U.K. Al...@mvps.D8E8L.org (remove the D8 bit)

PCfixinman

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 11:19:03 AM10/17/04
to
Hi Alex,

Windows CHKDSK, is still reporting "8kb in bad sectors"
in the report after chkdsk /F is run, then OS rebooted..
Norton's disk doctor, does the same, but adds free space & security
descriptors to a CHKDSK run...(I checked the box for it to do this, otherwise
it runs the regular 3 during a CHKDSK run)

I used the seagate's seatools, to run & fix
these bad sectors...during that run, it told me it was going to overwrite
the data in the 2 bad sectors, each one = 4kb's it even stated, this data was
named
$badsect
which is why I cannot figure out why the OS is still reporting them...
and that I cannot find anything named $badsect
when I search the drive, with all hidden files, known file names, & hidden
protected files viewable...

Any Ideas?

TIA

PCFM

David Candy

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 11:42:16 AM10/17/04
to
There is no problem. You want to store data on bad sectors do you? Don't you like your data? Windows won't help you corrupt your data. Reformat the hard drive if you want corrupted files.

--
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.uscricket.com
"PCfixinman" <PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:23C01E78-1025-4F49...@microsoft.com...

David H. Lipman

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 11:49:53 AM10/17/04
to
It sounds like a bad hard disk and you should back up pertinent data and replace it.

Dave


"PCfixinman" <PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:23C01E78-1025-4F49...@microsoft.com...

David Candy

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 12:09:22 PM10/17/04
to
Bad sectors themselves don't imply a failing hard disk. An increasing number of bad sectors do. I think 2 is not enough data to tell. Event viewer will tell him if it failing from the drive's SMART status. If nothing is in event viewer then nothing is wrong.
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=cache:__kc1Gix2FEJ:www.ariolic.com/activesmart/smart-technology.html+SMART+hard+drives&hl=en&lr=lang_en|lang_es

The heads fly, with wings, a few micrometers above the surface. A bump crashes the little aeroplane and may take off some magnetic media.
--
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.uscricket.com
"David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message news:uNYF0DGt...@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

PCfixinman

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 1:45:02 PM10/17/04
to
David C...Obviously, I don't want to store data, on bad sectors...Do you?
thanks for the 411, on smart HDD's, I've read something similar, which is why
I have these questions...

that I cannot seem to get the words for the question, out in the right way,
is frustrating the S*%@

out of me, so here I go again...

Hi all,


This even about bad sectors anymore, as they all have been marked, & stored,
according to the manufacturer...and winXP pro SP2

here are my questions now

**If the drive, has marked these sectors bad, then isn't is feasible, that
they should no longer show as bad sectors during a CHKDSK on the OS of a
S.M.A.R.T HDD ???
***
They are no longer considered bad correct?
***
Why is windows still showing them as bad, they aren't right?
***
Windows had marked them bad during the first CHKDSK /F I ran...

I'm assuming that the seatools, having overwritten these sectors with
o1o1o1o1 fixed the sectors, similar to a low-level format, just of these 2
bad clusters...it reported, the 2 files data as windows reported it as:

$badsect
$badsect

Then it overwrote the data with zeros & ones...
Had I thought it important I would have saved this to the floppy, when
asked, but knowing they were the data XP used to mark bad sectors, I figured
on the next CHKDSK run, they would be gone...

This is, what XP used to mark bad sectors, it finds..true?

Now that these files no longer exist, I want to know how to tell XP, there
ARE NO BAD SECTORS so it stops showing them as bad..on that drive

Let's forget that the drive had/has bad sectors

please...

This is about getting ,my OS which runs fine, onto a new HDD without these
bad sectors marked following...

I think this would be like if I pulled a program, out of windows by deleting
it
(instead of using add/remove propgrams)

but let the Registry entries in

windows would think the program was still there, until I tried to run it, &
got a missing file error..right?

Is there a place in the registry, I can remove the registry entries, that
have these sectors marked bad still?

A place in the registry where $badsect entries, are stored

It's been over 3 weeks, since this happened..
it happened during the first CHKDSK run, I ever did ...I'm not sure if XP
ever tried running it on it's own...

Since this drive hasn't got more bad sectors, I'm satisfied the drive, as of
this time, will not fail..I back-up all pertinent data...just in case..
Anyway, Dell is not replacing a drive that only had 2 bad sectors, which are
no longer showing with their 90/90 DIAG software...they say it is fixed....

If it did get more, I figure they would have to replace it..

I already got a faster drive, then this stock 40GB 4200 RPM for a 60GB 7200
RPM Hitachi...but just like someone stated previously...

when they copied their win2000 pro OS, over to another drive, it carried,
the bad sectors files with it...

This is why I'm looking to get rid of, wherever the $badsect, or whatever
the file, reg entry etc.. is causing this bad sector info to transfer..

(when I copied it, to the new drive it showed 8kb in bad sectors on the new
drive too!!!)


Dave C,
Please give me some credit, I do not think I have asked a single stupid
question.

I do feel like I'm going in circles...

Kind Regards,

PCFM

R. McCarty

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 1:49:59 PM10/17/04
to
Buy Steve Gibson's program "SpinRite" version 6.0. It can and will
identify and repair defective areas on a drive. It has various levels
of diagnostics, which can take a big chunk of time.

If it (SpinRite) runs at level 4 indicates bad blocks, then they are bad.

Product Info/Details found here:
http://grc.com/sr/spinrite.htm

"PCfixinman" <PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:A80074F4-16AF-4501...@microsoft.com...

David Candy

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 1:57:46 PM10/17/04
to
Hard drive manufacturers hide bad sectors from the hardware, windows has no idea about the manufacturers bad sectors. All it knows is 2 sectors (assuming only 1 sector is bad per cluster) in what the manufacturers has said are ok aren't. It will never use those sectors again. Reformat your drive. If Fat32 scandisk (win version) from 98 can retest them.

--
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.uscricket.com
"PCfixinman" <PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:A80074F4-16AF-4501...@microsoft.com...

davexnet02

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 2:05:46 PM10/17/04
to
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:19:47 -0600, "Bill James" <wgj...@mvps.org>
wrote:

>All that the drive utilities are telling you is that there are currently no bad sectors,
>except for those already blocked out, and response time, etc. are within tolerance.
>Typically it's deterioration of the disk surface that causes drives to fail, and that
>process accelerates as more and more as the surface starts shedding. Yes, there are
>a certain number of bad segments on a new drive, but the initial check at time
>of manufacturing should mark and hide all of those. If the problems you found
>were on the first chkdsk ever run on the drive soon after purchase, I guess
>it's possible they were just missed in the q.a. process and damage may not go any further.
>
>Good luck, and watch that warrantee period -- they are shorter than they used to be.

I had developed a couple of sectors marked bad in the $badclus data
base, turned out to be due to a faulty Promise Ultra66 controller the
drive was connected to.
Problem is, Win2k / XP doesn't offer a way to unmark these bad
clusters. Why not? It used to be possible with fat32.

Dave


David Candy

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 2:04:58 PM10/17/04
to
You can't low level format (most likely as the manufacturers won't let you) because your hard drive isn't sensitive enough to pick up marginal sectors like the equipment in the factory. Zeroing does nothing.

Once out of the factory is the OS or nothing. I've seen people waste weeks of their life zeroing bad sectors. They tend to stay bad or become bad in a short while. But zeroing isn't a low level format.
--
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.uscricket.com
"PCfixinman" <PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:A80074F4-16AF-4501...@microsoft.com...

davexnet02

unread,
Oct 17, 2004, 2:13:58 PM10/17/04
to
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:45:02 -0700, "PCfixinman"
<PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> that I cannot seem to get the words for the question, out in the right way,
>is frustrating the S*%@
>
>out of me, so here I go again...
>
>
>
>Hi all,
>
>
>This even about bad sectors anymore, as they all have been marked, & stored,
>according to the manufacturer...and winXP pro SP2
>
>here are my questions now
>
>**If the drive, has marked these sectors bad, then isn't is feasible, that
>they should no longer show as bad sectors during a CHKDSK on the OS of a
>S.M.A.R.T HDD ???
>***
> They are no longer considered bad correct?
>***
> Why is windows still showing them as bad, they aren't right?
>***
>Windows had marked them bad during the first CHKDSK /F I ran...
>
>I'm assuming that the seatools, having overwritten these sectors with
>o1o1o1o1 fixed the sectors, similar to a low-level format, just of these 2
>bad clusters...it reported, the 2 files data as windows reported it as:
>
>$badsect
>$badsect
>

<big snip>
See if this addresses your concerns:
http://www.bodden.de/misc/ntfsrecovery/

Dave

Al Dykes

unread,
Oct 30, 2004, 10:09:49 PM10/30/04
to
In article <uyr0PZ7s...@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,

David H. Lipman <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>Do Nothing. The OS should read/write in data areas around those marked bad.
>The question is -- will the number of bad sectors increase ?
>
>Dave
>
>

Plan on replacing the disk. If it's still covered by I would. right
now. Check the make and serial #, most manufacturer's web sites will
tell you the warranty status, given the serial #.

Make good backups, frequently.


>
>
>"PCfixinman" <PCfix...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>news:08EF6D16-E623-4DB0...@microsoft.com...
>| Hi,
>|
>| I had 2 bad sectors, which were on a Seagate 2.5" HDD...
>| Using the manufacturers software, I was able to repair these sectors...
>| I used every other HDD manufacturers HDD software to check this disk, it is
>| clean, with no bad sectors, not even, those CHKDSK marked...
>|
>| What do I need to do, to remove these sectors marked as bad, in XP SP2 pro..
>| DO I need to re-install the OS, or are they hidden somewhere, I can find &
>| delete them...
>|
>| They were marked:
>|
>| $badsect
>|
>| Any Ideas?
>|
>| thanks!
>|
>| PCFM
>|
>|
>| --
>| One step closer to the edge...
>
>


--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
----

PCfixinman

unread,
Nov 3, 2004, 6:58:03 PM11/3/04
to
Hi Al,

Thanks for your reply.

To everyone else, I just wanted to thank you all as well.

It turned out, that after I re-installed XPpro on the New HDD(since copying
the working version, also copied the bad sector data to the new drive as
well. It was showing the same 8kb in bad sectors, even though, the brand new
HDD softwares showed nothing, none bad, marked etc..)

After reformatiing & re-installing XPpro on the newer HDD, I installed the
original HDD as a slave( the one with the 8kb in bad sectors still showing in
chkdsk, even though the software fixed them)

After using the HDD software to format the drive, I clean-installed an XP
home version on it. on the first CHKDSK /r
run, it came up 0kb in bad sectors...

I knew the smart drive fixed itself ..they(bad sectors) didn't show in the
software, only in WinXP...

Shouldn't there have been Registry entries, that I could have removed, which
would have removed the 8kb in bad sectors list?

This was the information I was looking for all along, I felt the issue was
not being addressed..but that all were, stating the same, about replacing a
drive which isn't bad...

I would have liked to have been able to keep my OS, copied over to the new
drive, less the 8kb bad sector listing...instead of having to do a clean
install, on the new disk, as I knew it didn't have 8kb in bad sectors as well

Kind Regards,

PCFM

PCfixinman

unread,
Nov 3, 2004, 7:02:02 PM11/3/04
to
Problem is, Win2k / XP doesn't offer a way to unmark these bad
clusters. Why not? It used to be possible with fat32.

See this was what I was wondering about, why not capable in XP, which is a
supposedly more advanced OS than win98?

PCFM

Bob I

unread,
Nov 4, 2004, 9:36:56 AM11/4/04
to
Likely reason is that there is little use for such a product. "8 kb" of
bad sectors on a drive with 10's or 100's of GIGAbytes equates to ZERO.

Ken Blake

unread,
Nov 4, 2004, 10:35:19 AM11/4/04
to
In news:418A3E88...@yahoo.com,
Bob I <bir...@yahoo.com> typed:

> Likely reason is that there is little use for such a product.
> "8 kb"
> of bad sectors on a drive with 10's or 100's of GIGAbytes
> equates to
> ZERO.


Besides 8KB being so little as to be inconsequential, trying to
unmark bad sectors is foolhardy. These were marked bad becasue
they *are* bad. If they are unmarked, and an important file gets
stored there, it's very likely that the file will be lost.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup

0 new messages