Low-cost 3 MB RAM card for Macintosh Classic

Zane Kaminski

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 5, 2021
371
608
93
Columbus, Ohio, USA
Kai's Mac Classic Reloaded is exciting! I have some chips from bombed SEs which I am anxious to put to use once I have a bit more time and space on the soldering bench. But I feel it would be a big shame if the project sort of went out the door with the original RAM card when we can make something less expensive, more reliable, and with less solder joints.

So this RAM card is (as usual) a collaboration with Garrett Fellers of Garrett's Workhop. On the card, I'm using two 1Mx16 DRAMs which can be FPM or EDO. There is a total of 4 MB of RAM on the card although only 3 MB is used in a regular Mac Classic. The two RAM chips can be had for $1-3 each. The Classic RAM card has three banks of RAM (two soldered, one set of SIMMs) so we have to sort of combine the /CAS signals for the two 512 kB banks so that they go to just one chip/bank. The signals normally going to the SIMMs can be sent to the other 1Mx16 DRAM unchanged since the two SIMMs have the same capacity and addressing as one of the chips on my board. Since there is an extra megabyte of RAM on the board, it would be possible to modify the Mac Classic with some jumpers that would allow the omission of the eight onboard RAM chips and all of the system RAM to come from the card. This is obviously cheaper if you're building your own Classic, plus less soldering. Board is two layers, made possible by the compact layout, etc. Effort has been made to ensure good paths for the return current despite the two-layer construction. The whole thing is not too much bigger than the connector itself (which doesn't have too many ground pins) so I don't anticipate any issues going to two layers.

Garrett and I have our hands full with a very long list of stuff to do and I didn't wanna add another thing on the Garrett's Workshop to-do list. So Garrett Bunge has kindly agreed to put some together for testing purposes. (What a coinky-dink!) Unfortunately the card is just so simple that we are not recruiting more testers at this time; the only possible problem would just be a wiring mistake so we just need to put the card together and make sure it works. The card will eventually be for sale for something like $20-30 including shipping anywhere in the US.

Board rendering and schematic:
FrontIsom.png

Schematic.png

Source: https://github.com/garrettsworkshop/MacClassicRAMCard

Current Project Status - July 6, 2021
50 units are in production. Should be completed and ready for sale in the next few weeks.

Old content from original post:
I haven't had a chance to add a LICENSE file to the repo but we will be dual-licensing under the same simple scheme we always use at GW. Commercial use under CC-BY-SA is allowed, just remove the "Garrett's Workshop" text since we would rather compatible boards not masquerade as genuine products. You can put your own logo/company name on instead! If you're just making 'em for you and friends, you can use the gerbers as-is with the Garrett's Workshop branding under CC-BY-NC-SA.

Board photo:
1637011256894.png


Schematic (dead simple!):
1637011296205.png


Current Problem - Connector Sourcing
The biggest current problem is the connector. I have intentionally put a different type of connector on the board than comes on the original card. The original connector is $7. I wanna sell the card for $25 or something, so too much to spend on just a connector. Therefore I have put a more ordinary right-angle type connector on the board instead. Problem is that 2x22 pin size female 2.54mm pitch right angle header connectors are very, very uncommon. So we will have to double up the connectors. I think it'll work. Maybe... 2x17 (IBM floppy) + 2x5 (JTAG, etc.), 2x8 + 2x14, 2x10 (JTAG, etc.) + 2x12. Those are (owing to their respective functions) the most common sizes that add up to 2x22. Any good? We might have to shave down the edges slightly but these sizes are really cheap, as low as $0.25 each. Or is just worth the $7 for the original connector type? Typically for products like this, the selling price has to be 3x parts cost to cover shipping, manufacturing scrap, returns/defective products, etc. and make a little money. But we can probably just like ignore that type of analysis lol and tack $7 on the price to pay for the connector and it'll be fine since the product is so simple there aren't lots of opportunities for stuff to go wrong. What's best?
 
Last edited:

alxlab

Active Tinkerer
Sep 23, 2021
287
312
63
www.alxlab.com
Yeah for such a case I usually just get a larger connect and snip off the rest. Can get some 2 x 40 pin right angle connector for ~$1 each

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001288367127.html

Gonna see if I can find this type in 2.54:

1637014084656.png


Kinda like how the pins are close and under the connector.
 
Last edited:

Zane Kaminski

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 5, 2021
371
608
93
Columbus, Ohio, USA

alxlab

Active Tinkerer
Sep 23, 2021
287
312
63
www.alxlab.com
The Molex part ($11 CAD) seems to be roughly around the same price for me as the Samtec ($10 CAD). Both don't have mounting ears though. The Molex is in stock though on Mouser in the previous link above.

TE used to make a 44 pos connctor as well 7-532956-8 but it seems to be marked as obsolete though. I've attached the datasheet.
 

Attachments

  • ENG_CD_532956_AF3.pdf
    215.6 KB · Views: 86

Zane Kaminski

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 5, 2021
371
608
93
Columbus, Ohio, USA
I think that given the high prices for the old-style connectors and the fact that the RAM card is so short (and doesn't need too much extra support), we should probably just try and adapt new-manufacture connectors. But which is easier? Sanding off a bit of the edges so they'll fit with the right pitch or cutting off multiple rows of a wider connector?
 
  • Like
Reactions: alxlab

alxlab

Active Tinkerer
Sep 23, 2021
287
312
63
www.alxlab.com
Agreed that using the cheaper standard 2.54mm pitch headers makes more sense to keep costs low.

Think cutting would be easier. I just use wire snips so it's pretty fast. If you wanted a nice clean cut then could probably make a jig with a miter saw.
 

alxlab

Active Tinkerer
Sep 23, 2021
287
312
63
www.alxlab.com
Oooh. So that would attach to a generic 44-pin header though, right?

If you mean PCB footprint then no. The pin spacing is different for the original ram card connector.

If you mean the ram card header on the Classic logic board then yeah it the same spacing as a standard 2.54mm pin header.
 

Zane Kaminski

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 5, 2021
371
608
93
Columbus, Ohio, USA
I built time ago a couple of these FPU cards for the Classic II and in the BOM there's the DigiKey reference for the connector (I think is the same than the one in the Classic):
It’s a 50-pin connector for the Classic II FPU Card instead of 44 on the Classic RAM card, I think. Still expensive too, like $10 for the part on his BOM.

Garrett has suggested not using equal-ish size right angle connectors but instead using one 2x20 and one 2x2. Sounds odd but his rationale is to put any possible pin misalignment towards one end of the card, as opposed to in the middle. The thought is that the effect of an angular misalignment in the middle sort of gets magnified as you go outward so it’s best to put the disjunction between the two connectors towards the edge of the connector pin/socket field. Not sure if that’s the best way but the rationale brings up an interesting point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trag

Zane Kaminski

Administrator
Staff member
Founder
Sep 5, 2021
371
608
93
Columbus, Ohio, USA
One thing before I send the board to be fabbed. The card is short so there is no apparent need for the board to "slot in" to the slots on the sides of the connector box and I don't even know if the dimensions for that will be the same since we're using the right angle connector:
1637183980308.png


But the card is tall enough to come up to the rails on the chassis:
1637184092533.png


The dimensions of the board in my first post are not very wide so that board would be completely not touching the rails, with 0.5cm+ on each side.

So I tried making the board wider in order to slot into the rails but that looks kinda ridiculous even with the same margin added to the top:
Screen Shot 2021-11-16 at 9.32.02 PM.png
Screen Shot 2021-11-16 at 9.30.41 PM.png


Should I just stick with the smallest board outline possible as I had before? I added a bit of a taper on the bottom to dodge the connector box on the motherboard in case the dimensions aren't right to slot into the sides:
Screen Shot 2021-11-17 at 4.25.28 PM.png

Should this shape (above ^) be final? I think it'll be fine to just stick up from the Mac rather than going in either of the rails but I'm not 100% sure. Anyone think otherwise?
 
Last edited:

alxlab

Active Tinkerer
Sep 23, 2021
287
312
63
www.alxlab.com
Personally I would make it use the rails but I wouldn't too concerned about it. I can understand why they put the rails though. Makes sure the card doesn't move in the slot and putting stress on boards/connectors. Don't think people will be lugging these computers around too much anymore.

Regarding the main board header slot it shouldn't be a problem as long as the pcb is 1.6mm thickness.A the cheap $1 headers have the same thickness as the original connector so the board would be in the same position as the original.
IMG_20211117_164128.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zane Kaminski