You could create a few disks, one formatted as 40 track and the other 80. Create a boot disk with park.com on it. Maybe a spare or two.

Chances are that park.com is located on the hard drive as well.

I read mixed experiences about shipdisk.com - I wouldn't use it just to be safe.

Wrapping the unit in blankets is a good idea.

I've had the best results using the PARK program which is included with spinrite 2.

An XT is almost certainly going to have a 40 track drive. The only way the XT could possibly support high density 5.25 drives would be with the use of an aftermarket floppy controller as well as an option ROM, which was very uncommon for XT owners to do.

If you have a 40 track drive in your possession that is the best option. If you only have 80 track drives, they can write to 40 track disks just fine as long as the disk is either unused or bulk erased first

alfiehicks wrote on 2025-01-23, 21:21:

(...) original MFM hard drive and the seller showed it to be in working condition. I've heard that these drives don't park their heads (...)

Some do, like ST-251, most don't.

alfiehicks wrote on 2025-01-23, 21:21:

Is there a general consensus as to which program to use for parking MFM drive heads?

Here's a parking utility, IIRC from Spinrite II package by Gibson Research Corporation. I'm pretty sure it can be considered PD at this point. Works for me but I've noticed Norton Cache in its default configuration can unpark the heads a second or so after the program has been run. So don't use NCACHE before transport, preferably boot from clean DOS floppy and run PARK from there. Smartdrv seems OK but I wouldn't risk it either.

alfiehicks wrote on 2025-01-23, 21:21:

Is there a way of determining if a drive is 80-track versus 40-track?

Not sure about original IBMs but clones (late 286 and newer) have BIOSes that will detect 360k drive by stepping it over 42 cylinders. That option is called Floppy Seek on Boot. So if you set the drive to 1.2M and it's actually a 40-track 360k one BIOS will report FDD error.

alfiehicks wrote on 2025-01-23, 21:21:

Am I overthinking this? I'll only be travelling about ten miles, and I plan to bring a lot of soft bedclothes to wrap it all in, so should I just not bother with the idea of parking the heads?

Nope. Park the heads. It might seem like it would also be best to have the HDD placed vertically but don't do that. It'll work with NECs that have head lock mechanism but in Seagates the head will just move due to bumps and vibrations and might unpark and scratch the surface. The heads on these disks are quite big and their mass can cause damage to platters if dropped for example. So if you want to make sure the HDD survives the potholes cushion the whole PC as best as you can - that's in addition to parking the heads.

maxtherabbit wrote on 2025-01-23, 22:12:

An XT is almost certainly going to have a 40 track drive. The only way the XT could possibly support high density 5.25 drives would be with the use of an aftermarket floppy controller as well as an option ROM, which was very uncommon for XT owners to do.

It's got a single half-height drive, might that be an indication of it being an aftermarket high density replacement? There's also what appears to be a card with a female DB-25 connector in the 8th expansion slot, and I know that slot is slightly weird. Could it be a floppy controller card that supports an external drive?

Either way, I suppose I should target the lowest common denominator and just write a 40-track disk, since as far as I've gathered, it'll still be readable on the off chance it does happen to be an 80-track drive.

Deunan wrote on 2025-01-23, 22:22:

alfiehicks wrote on 2025-01-23, 21:21:

Am I overthinking this? I'll only be travelling about ten miles, and I plan to bring a lot of soft bedclothes to wrap it all in, so should I just not bother with the idea of parking the heads?

Nope. Park the heads. It might seem like it would also be best to have the HDD placed vertically but don't do that. It'll work with NECs that have head lock mechanism but in Seagates the head will just move due to bumps and vibrations and might unpark and scratch the surface. The heads on these disks are quite big and their mass can cause damage to platters if dropped for example. So if you want to make sure the HDD survives the potholes cushion the whole PC as best as you can - that's in addition to parking the heads.

What do you mean by having the HDD placed vertically? Do you mean to say that putting the machine on its side as if it were a tower is a bad idea for transportation? Or are you saying that I should do that?

alfiehicks wrote on 2025-01-23, 22:41:

What do you mean by having the HDD placed vertically? Do you mean to say that putting the machine on its side as if it were a tower is a bad idea for transportation? Or are you saying that I should do that?

I'm saying don't do that. It might seem like a good idea but it's not unless you know enough about that particular HDD type to be certain the heads won't move.

As for the female DB25 it's probably serial port, old style connector.

The standard FDC used in an XT couldn't read/write HD disks ... so it's likely a DD disk (360k for 5.25, 720k for
3.5).

80 track DD 5.25" drives do exist, but they were not normally used in a PC.
Virtually all 3.5" drives are 80 track - both DD and HD editions exist.

Most OS's can double-step 80 track drives to read/write 40 track diskettes (you normally
only see this on 5.25" drives) be aware that the actual tracks are thinner on the head of an 80
track drive, and if you use media formerly written 80-track, then re-written 40-track on an 80-track
drive (with double stepping) ... it can cause reliability problems when read on a 40-track drive as it's
fatter head may see interfering partial signals from the now-unused extra thin tracks in between the ones
in use - best to use never written or bulk erased diskettes when writing 40-track images in an 80-track
drive which you might need to read back on a 40-track drive!

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

You might consider whether any tantalum capacitors will blow and possibly freak out the seller vs. being more careful with the drive
edit: Never mind, you said it already works

jakethompson1 wrote on 2025-01-24, 01:12:

You might consider whether any tantalum capacitors will blow and possibly freak out the seller vs. being more careful with the drive
edit: Never mind, you said it already works

I'm still prepared for it to potentially go bang; always the case with old stuff. I'll warn them about it, too.

DaveDDS wrote on 2025-01-24, 00:25:

80 track DD 5.25" drives do exist, but they were not normally used in a PC.

I assume you mean they were not normally used in this generation of PCs, right?

Deunan wrote on 2025-01-23, 22:58:

I'm saying don't do that. It might seem like a good idea but it's not unless you know enough about that particular HDD type to be certain the heads won't move.

Great, thanks. As for the monitor, I would imagine conventional wisdom applies - screen facing down to avoid snapping the neck - but if there's any special care instructions then I'll be grateful to know.

alfiehicks wrote on 2025-01-24, 06:23:

As for the monitor, I would imagine conventional wisdom applies - screen facing down to avoid snapping the neck - but if there's any special care instructions then I'll be grateful to know.

Yes, that is preferable. Each positon has its pros and cons:
- on the mount, standing: serious shakes / deep potholes can sometimes cause enough stress on the neck (via the neck PCB or yoke) to kill the tube.
- face down: any dirt (mostly something flaking off the internals) can get wedged in the shadow mask, causing dead spot.
- face up: dirt can foul the guns, causing bad emissions and very poor picture (or just one of the colors)

All in all though face down is the safest, but if the monitor is relatively small (up to 15" CRT) and you can't fit it in the car face down for some reason, have it standing upright but not in the trunk. Or flatbed. Put it on one of the seats.
Obviously if somebody rams their car into yours all bets are off, but then the monitor will probably not the be the most imporant thing to worry about.

Deunan wrote on 2025-01-24, 14:45:

Yes, that is preferable. Each positon has its pros and cons: - on the mount, standing: serious shakes / deep potholes can someti […]
Show full quote

Yes, that is preferable. Each positon has its pros and cons:
- on the mount, standing: serious shakes / deep potholes can sometimes cause enough stress on the neck (via the neck PCB or yoke) to kill the tube.
- face down: any dirt (mostly something flaking off the internals) can get wedged in the shadow mask, causing dead spot.
- face up: dirt can foul the guns, causing bad emissions and very poor picture (or just one of the colors)

All in all though face down is the safest, but if the monitor is relatively small (up to 15" CRT) and you can't fit it in the car face down for some reason, have it standing upright but not in the trunk. Or flatbed. Put it on one of the seats.
Obviously if somebody rams their car into yours all bets are off, but then the monitor will probably not the be the most imporant thing to worry about.

Oh, whoops, I thought I stated what type of monitor it is - that's why I was wondering about special considerations. It's an IBM 5151 monochrome display, so there's no shadow mask for dirt to get wedged in, right?

alfiehicks wrote on 2025-01-24, 15:22:

It's an IBM 5151 monochrome display, so there's no shadow mask for dirt to get wedged in, right?

Correct, monochrome CRTs don't require the gun spots separated for color purity so there is no need for any kind of mask. That also makes them brighter at lower HV and usually longer lasting, but that also depends on the gun quality. Sadly some people run them very bright (perhaps due to ambient light) and that can result in burn-ins. Don't leave it on with one pattern, use screen savers and/or cycle the contents.

Anyway, for mono CRT the face down is not an issue.

alfiehicks wrote on 2025-01-24, 06:18:

DaveDDS wrote on 2025-01-24, 00:25:

80 track DD 5.25" drives do exist, but they were not normally used in a PC.

I assume you mean they were not normally used in this generation of PCs, right?

No, 80-track DD 5.25" drives were not generally used in any generation of PC.
80-track 5.25" drives used on AT+ PC's are/were HD (1.2m) - an 80-track DD drive
is 720k - fairly common in 3.5" ... but quite rare in 5.25"

I do know that they exist... while developing ImageDisk I sought to get at least one of
every possible drive type that could interface to the Nec765 FDC (the standard on a PC)

It took me a while but I did find one (and only one), a Teac FD-55F (which I still have).

PS: The reason 80-track 5.25" HD often appeared on/since the AT and not on the XT
is because the drive rotates at a different speed than DD drives (360rpm instead of 300rpm
- more like an 8" drive). To handle this and maintain DD compatibility the FDC has to be
able to transfer data at two different rates (500kbps for HD and 300kbps for DD-in-HD
- a standard DD(only) transfers data at 250kbps. The AT+ FDC implements all three rates
since you could still use DD drives on an AT.

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

Deunan wrote on 2025-01-23, 22:22:

Here's a parking utility, IIRC from Spinrite II package by Gibson Research Corporation. I'm pretty sure it can be considered PD at this point. Works for me but I've noticed Norton Cache in its default configuration can unpark the heads a second or so after the program has been run. So don't use NCACHE before transport, preferably boot from clean DOS floppy and run PARK from there. Smartdrv seems OK but I wouldn't risk it either.

Sorry, I forgot to ask earlier - is the PARK.COM file that you provided made for a specific version of DOS or will it run on any version?

IIRC I've run that on DOS 3.3, 5.0 and 6.22 and it always worked properly. As for DOS 2.0 or earlier I can't say...

Deunan wrote on 2025-01-29, 17:46:

IIRC I've run that on DOS 3.3, 5.0 and 6.22 and it always worked properly. As for DOS 2.0 or earlier I can't say...

Thanks. Out of curiosity I ran it on a 486 with DOS 6.22 and it seemed to run fine. I've now written a minimal 6.22 boot disk with nothing on it besides PARK.COM, and I bought a proper Shugart 360k drive to write it on. I'll be collecting the machine tomorrow, and I am fully prepared. I just need to hope none of the capacitors decide to go boom when I power it up.

UPDATE:
I got it home, and it works!

Also, to my great surprise, 640K!

I nearly shat myself when I had it running at the seller's house: the power suddenly went out, and I thought it'd died and tripped a breaker, but he said they'd had a powercut about 10 minutes before I arrived, so it must have just been another one. For some reason, though, it wouldn't boot from either of the disks I wrote - thankfully it could still run PARK.COM, and I didn't see Norton in a quick dir of the hard drive.

Regardless, I have it now, and it works. Thank you so much to everyone who helped, it's really been invaluable.