Cache container size?

[+Lacomo]

Here's the deal. I took a rock and drilled/chiseled out a hole the size of a 35 MM film container. I glued a film container in the hole and mortared around it. The rock is the right size to list as a small but it has a micro size compartment. How do I list it, small or micro?

[+linuxxpert]

Micro, I have sorta the same concept out there, when there is only room for a log, its a micro...

[+Kealia]

Micro. The cache size should determine the size rating, not the camo.

[+Isonzo Karst]

Think about the swag, and travel bugs when determining cache size. If the cache isn't going to accommodate the smallest travel bug (the Diabetes bugs), it's a micro. The camo isn't the cache.

[+sbell111]

There was a similar thread a few weeks ago. In that thread, someone (BS?) convinced me to change my mind on the issue. Previously, I would have said 'micro', but now I think that I would list it as a small and note that only micro tradeables will fit.

 

Here's the older thread, but you may as well skip reading it since Brian reiterated his argument right below this post.

Edited October 31, 2007 by sbell111

[+briansnat]

I personally think that if the container and camo are one piece, you go with the size of the entire object. If you hid something in a Thermos and the outside made it a large and the inside was a small, would you call it a small? I wouldn't.

 

If the container is meant to be removed from the camo (e.g. a bison cylinder in a log) then you go with the

actual conainer.

 

Thee are two reasons for listing size. The primary reason is so you know what you are looking for. Knowing what to bring to trade is another reason, but it's a distant second.

[+Scare Force One]

I would say Micro. Its the size of the place you are going to put swag that counts in my oppinion. Imagine if someone sees small on the site and brings their TB only to discover that they have wasted their time becuse it is too big to fit ino the mirco container.

 

~.~ Scare Force One

[+sbell111]

I would say Micro. Its the size of the place you are going to put swag that counts in my oppinion. Imagine if someone sees small on the site and brings their TB only to discover that they have wasted their time becuse it is too big to fit ino the mirco container.

 

~.~ Scare Force One

The reason that I discarded that argument for myself is because there are so many reasons that I might decide not to leave a TB in a cache. For instance, many times, I have brought a TB to release, but kept it in my pocket because the cache had severe maintenance issues or was too muggle friendly.

 

In my mind, the size rating is to assist the finder in making the find, not to preselect trade items. Otherwise, I don't believe that we would have the 'not chosen' option for size.

[CoyoteRed]

I'd go with micro. I prefer knowing the inside volume of the cache.

 

I reject the size of the object argument in that if the only difference is whether the actual cache container is attached to the concealment then I don't get why one would be one size and the other different. The search is still the exact same as I outlined in that other thread. There is no difference in you picking up a rock to find the cache under it or find the cache embedded in that rock. The hunt is the same.

Edited October 31, 2007 by CoyoteRed

[+sbell111]

I'd go with micro. I prefer knowing the inside volume of the cache.

 

I reject the size of the object argument in that if the only difference is whether the actual cache container is attached to the concealment then I don't get why one would be one size and the other different. The search is still the exact same as I outlined in that other thread. There is no difference in you picking up a rock to find the cache under it or find the cache embedded in that rock. The hunt is the same.

Not if you don't turn the rock over.

[+ZSandmann]

I would call it a micro, a 35MM is a 35MM regardless of if it is under/in/on/ or tied to a rock IMO. Of course you always have the option to list it as an unknown size, I've seen those before where the container is part of a much larger thing.

[+KoosKoos]

Cache sizes for all caches that have a physical container.

 

* Micro (35 mm film canister or smaller – less than approximately 3 ounces or .1 litres -- typically containing only a logbook)

* Small (Sandwich-sized Tupperware-style container or similar -- less than approximately 1 quart or litre -- holds trade items as well as a logbook)

* Regular (Tupperware-style container or ammo can)

* Large (5 gallon/20 litre bucket or larger)

 

I think a 35mm film canister is the container...that's a micro.

 

In the thermos example, I might list it as a small, but make note that the internal dimensions are significantly smaller. Containers with unmatched dimensions like that are a bit of an exception.

[+briansnat]

I'd go with micro. I prefer knowing the inside volume of the cache.

 

I reject the size of the object argument in that if the only difference is whether the actual cache container is attached to the concealment then I don't get why one would be one size and the other different. The search is still the exact same as I outlined in that other thread. There is no difference in you picking up a rock to find the cache under it or find the cache embedded in that rock. The hunt is the same.

 

I disagree with that. If I'm looking for a micro I probably don't pick up that softball sized fake rock to examine it. For a micro I'm usually looking for a tiny, stand-alone container that is inside things or attached to things, so a small sized fake rock would not get my attention. If the description said small, it might be one of the first things I look at.

 

If I'm hiding a cache in a pallet of ammo boxes and I take an ammo box and fill it with that hardening foam spray, then sink a film canister inside it, does it become a micro? Not to me.

Edited October 31, 2007 by briansnat

[knowschad]

We have caches around here that say things like "you're looking for a micro in a small's body".

 

If you have a 35mm container attached to a steam locomotive with a magnet, would you list it as a large? Of course not. Its the container size that matters (although I can see Briansnat's point).

[+StarBrand]

I would call it a "micro hidden in larger camo". Micro is the size of the actual cache container and not what surrounds it.

 

If I glue (wire, nail, screw, hook in) a film can into the hollow of a tree - is it now a large cache?? Or are you saying you would not search the tree because it was listed as a micro? I guess I just do not understand the "if it is removable" part of the argument.

 

Say I mortar it in the hole in the rock so now it is a small but if I can slide it out of the very same hole it is a micro?

 

In the second case you would skip the small rock because it said micro cache? hmmmmm

 

explain more.......

[+KoosKoos]

I disagree with that. If I'm looking for a micro I probably don't pick up that softball sized fake rock to examine it. For a micro I'm usually looking for a tiny, stand-alone container that is inside things or attached to things, so a small sized fake rock would not get my attention. If the description said small, it might be one of the first things I look at.

 

If I'm hiding a cache in a pallet of ammo boxes and I take an ammo box and fill it with that hardening foam spray, then sink a film canister inside it, does it become a micro? Not to me.

 

And I guess I don't see the problem...because eventually I'd pick up the rock to see if the micro container was underneath it...if it was listed as a small, I'd figure the cache probably wasn't under that little rock.

[+wimseyguy]

One local hider's standard opening line is "this cache began life as a silver bison tube". It's excellent wording as you know that the actual cache container is a micro, but you are most likely looking for something much more creative and evil than a tube hanging in an evergreen tree.

 

"This cache began life as a 35mm film can" has a very good ring to it as well. It suggests to the seekers that they might be looking for something a bit more. Are you sure that it is in fact a 35 mm and not one of the newer 24 mm ones though?

 

I see those mislabeled all the time.

[+Renegade Knight]

Micro. The cache size should determine the size rating, not the camo.

Excellent summary.

[+briansnat]

If I glue (wire, nail, screw, hook in) a film can into the hollow of a tree - is it now a large cache??

 

No, it would be an archived cache.

[+elmuyloco5]

Cache sizes for all caches that have a physical container.

 

* Micro (35 mm film canister or smaller – less than approximately 3 ounces or .1 litres -- typically containing only a logbook)

* Small (Sandwich-sized Tupperware-style container or similar -- less than approximately 1 quart or litre -- holds trade items as well as a logbook)

* Regular (Tupperware-style container or ammo can)

* Large (5 gallon/20 litre bucket or larger)

 

I think a 35mm film canister is the container...that's a micro.

 

In the thermos example, I might list it as a small, but make note that the internal dimensions are significantly smaller. Containers with unmatched dimensions like that are a bit of an exception.

I think the "micro" would actually need to be changed to reflect the soda pop forms that many people use. They are slightly longer than a film canister, and other than really small coins or a rolled up bill, they won't hold anything more than a log and a pencil either. I've fit coins and bills into film canisters easier than the pop tubes as they are just a bit larger in diameter.

[CoyoteRed]

If I'm hiding a cache in a pallet of ammo boxes and I take an ammo box and fill it with that hardening foam spray, then sink a film canister inside it, does it become a micro? Not to me.

I would dare say that it wouldn't get overlooked because of it's size.

 

OTOH, I have folks looking under finials for a SAW can.

 

Anyway, the ammo can looks like a container. A person would automatically assume that may be the cache and pick it up regardless of what the description said.

 

As for the part you say about not picking up a small sized rock to look for a micro, I'd say you're not being very thorough. I'd do that in a heart beat. I'd do it for any object that might be hiding an object underneath. We learned that long ago because of a hollowed out log. The size of the log would have been most definitely a large yet we were looking for a regular. IOW, I'd examine every object which may be, or may be hiding, the cache container of a size specified. Micros can be hidden in objects that are small or regular, even large, in size. You have to examine them or walk away if they are inside. Simple as that. The fact they are attached, embedded, stickied, a tight fit, or just inserted loosely really has no bearing.

[+TrailGators]

It's a micro because most swag won't fit in the cache.

[+DanOCan]

I'm voting for micro -- in this case.

 

Using the example of a 35mm foamed into an ammo can I would be inclined to vote "Regular" or "Not Choosen".

 

I make my decision on a case-by-case basis -- guidelines are supposed to be starting point, not the end-all be-all when it comes to making decisions.