>>AS you should have been. The explanation I posted was gleaned from reading other's solution to this problem, and until this afternoon, I had never tested it myself. I performed some similar tests to yours, and came up with the same conclusion: datetime fields store what they display. Sorry for temporarily misleading you.
>
>
>Erik, did you see my second post? (I forgot to copy you on that one.) What do you think about those strange hex values for date-time fields?
>
>01/10/2000 13:32:22 or 62 68 25 00 6F BE E7 02 in hex
>01/10/2000 13:32:23 or 62 68 25 00 57 C2 E7 02 in hex
>


They certainly look like they are leaving room for a lot more precision. Hmmmm.