Hey, not meant to sound as dumb as it probably will sound, but in my experience there are several of my disks that worked great in 0.1 but don't work in 0.3 (I get that eject disk... error often). I've read everything and contributed my info to the wiki, so don't flame me please, I already know the obvious answers...
but anyway it seems likely to me that the reason my discs worked before is because the old loader reads through disc errors better. As we all know, ALL burned discs have errors, it's a question of how many and how well the reading hardware/software can interpolate the error free data. So probably those discs that are now causing me trouble have more errors (or errors in more troublesome places) than my "working" 0.3 discs.
But since these discs DID work fine in 0.1 (100% of the time, super reliable), could it be that there's a way to improve 0.3's error checking/retry routines so that reliability is increased for everyone experiencing these sort of issues? While I'm a coder, I don't know the Wii stuff at all and haven't even looked at the source code for these loaders, Cioses and so on. But it seems possible to me that probably CIOS 6 (could be wrong there) has a routine for reading disc data that could be checking for errors, if error==found then retry last sector. I don't know if the code these guys are writing gets to such a low level in the disc reading system architecture, if not then there's not much that can be done I would think, in which case never mind... :-)
Obviously this is an ignorant superficial concept the way I've laid it out, but just in the wild off chance that nobody else has thought of it yet, well, I figure it's worth mentioning just in case. I'm probably wrong - but it never hurts to suggest something right?
EDIT: PS, I should mention that I'm not looking for a solution to my problem, I will experiment with burning speeds etc for my own personal benefit. This is just a thought for the developer(s) in the unlikely event that they haven't looked at this yet (although I expect my idea is either fundamentally wrong or has long since been looked into).
Cheers