Real 100% waterproof cache

[+texasgrillchef]

I know for a fact that my PVC container is good for in excess of 40' of water. Though it's only hidden in a few feet of water.

 

LOL... Well considering most Otter/Pelican boxes are made of PVC or similar, I am not suprised. PVC pipe is a great inexpensive way of making a good waterproof cache. At least for 99% of the cache types most of us deal with.

 

TGC

[+texasgrillchef]

If you want the BEST.... get a Pelican or Otter box. They aren't cheap. But they are among the best. I worked Search & Rescue for many years. A Pelican or Otter box is the ONLY thing that we would buy because it's the ONLY thing that could handle EMS/Fire/S&R without failing on us in times of need.

 

I'd put a $5 ammo can (with some TLC) up against a $30 Pelican or Otter Box any day of the week.

 

I would have to say that, all depends on the condition of your Ammo Can & the size. You can get Pelican/Otter box's alot larger than what I have seen available at military surplus stores.

 

Also depends on how it's going to be used. Ammo cans being made of steel can handle circumstances that Pelican/Otter boxes can't handle.

 

So I would say Yes you are correct... to some degree. But not 100%.

 

TGC

[+texasgrillchef]

My pill bottles are water tight, but I don't think any caching container can keep moisture out....Stay safe

 

A pill bottle that keeps water out while submerged for long periods? Really?

 

Depends on the pill bottle

 

Are you talking about those that come from you typical Walmart Pharmacy, Or those that come from a mail order pharmacy like Medco?

 

My Medco pill bottles are alot better quality than you get from Walgreens or Walmart. They are made higher grade PVC plastic, they have a rubber seal gasket on the lid. They also have a different style child safety lid on them as well. I use a bunch for my cache hides. Left one in my Hot tub for a week, pinned in the filter basket. Didn't leak at all. (I put a couple of test strips in it as well as a moisture indicator that would turn red if humidy was above 95%.)

 

Those from walmart... only lasted about 2 hours before they started to leak.

 

TGC

[+texasgrillchef]

Nothing and I mean NOTHING is 100% waterproof.

I say this because you take anything DEEP enough underwater and it will eventually leak.

I reckon THAT depends ON your DEFINITION of DEEP enough. WOULD being AS deep AS physically POSSIBLE count? I seem TO recall A certain VESSEL travelling TO the DEEPEST spot ON the PLANET, and IT didn't LEAK.

 

Maybe IF they HAD brought A shovel THEY could've ESCAVATED down A bit FARTHER till THEY reached YOUR magical LEAK point?

 

Actually if your refering to the deepest part of the ocean which is the "Marianas Trench" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench

 

If you do further research though, you will find that the 3 submersibles that went that deep were only rated to be able to go another 200 meters down before they would have reached what is known as "Crush" depth.

 

So yes, if they brought along a "pointy thing" and dug deeper. They could reach that magical point. The point I was trying to make is that in theory, true waterproofing doesn't exist. As the word would imply that it does. It's water resistance that we are after.

 

But I will give you points for at least being smart enough to know that we have at least on this planet so far, have been succesful in getting to the deepest part of the ocean without imploding.

TGC

[Clan Riffster]

Well considering most Otter/Pelican boxes are made of PVC or similar, I am not suprised.

The type of plastic used to make the colored OtterBoxes is an ABS plastic that’s reinforced with fiberglass. The type of plastic used to make clear OtterBoxes is high impact polycarbonate. While all three materials could be referred to as "plastic", your comparison would be like saying aluminum would make a great knife building material since it's basically the same as high carbon steel, as they are both metal.

 

PVC pipe is a great inexpensive way of making a good waterproof cache.

I've found around 30 PVC pipe containers. Of these, one was dry inside.

Based strictly on these numbers, I'd say PVC pipe is a great inexpensive way of making a soggy log cache.

In the 29+ soggy PVC caches I've found, the failure point was the opening.

I'd love to try bittsen's ball valve idea, as I think that would work better than any others I've found.

But since just the valve would cost me $14 for a 2", that kinda kicks out the inexpensive angle.

If I were to build one using a ball valve, I'd prefer one bigger than 2", but that would cost even more.

Perhaps the motto here is, when considering submerged caches, cheaper isn't always better?

[+Castle Mischief]

 

I'd love to try bittsen's bflentje's ball valve idea, as I think that would work better than any others I've found.

 

DOOD FEEXED IT 4 U.

[+Castle Mischief]

My Medco pill bottles are alot better quality than you get from Walgreens or Walmart. They are made higher grade PVC plastic, they have a rubber seal gasket on the lid. They also have a different style child safety lid on them as well. I use a bunch for my cache hides. Left one in my Hot tub for a week, pinned in the filter basket. Didn't leak at all. (I put a couple of test strips in it as well as a moisture indicator that would turn red if humidy was above 95%.)

 

I'd be interested in seeing these, as I've never seen one before. Could you put a picture of one up? It sounds like these might be pretty cool.

[+bittsen]

 

I'd love to try bittsen's bflentje's ball valve idea, as I think that would work better than any others I've found.

 

DOOD FEEXED IT 4 U.

 

Perhaps Clan was referring to a post I made a few months ago that would incorporate a large ball valve and PVC. That's how I took it.

[+Castle Mischief]

 

I'd love to try bittsen's bflentje's ball valve idea, as I think that would work better than any others I've found.

 

DOOD FEEXED IT 4 U.

 

Perhaps Clan was referring to a post I made a few months ago that would incorporate a large ball valve and PVC. That's how I took it.

 

My bad. I thought he was talking about the ball-valve PVC container that bflentje already has out in the wild.

[Clan Riffster]

DOOD FEEXED IT 4 U.

To quote the venerable Homer J. Simpson; "Doh!"

 

Perhaps Clan was referring to a post I made a few months ago that would incorporate a large ball valve and PVC.

Uh... Yeah! That's it! (Wheh... Nice save bittsen!)

[+texasgrillchef]

I'd be interested in seeing these, as I've never seen one before. Could you put a picture of one up? It sounds like these might be pretty cool.

 

Here ya go... I have purple vinyl tape wrapped around the bottle where the perscription sticker would be. The top has a white silicon/rubber type gasket.

 

 

TGC

[+Vater_Araignee]

Nothing and I mean NOTHING is 100% waterproof.

I say this because you take anything DEEP enough underwater and it will eventually leak.

I reckon THAT depends ON your DEFINITION of DEEP enough. WOULD being AS deep AS physically POSSIBLE count? I seem TO recall A certain VESSEL travelling TO the DEEPEST spot ON the PLANET, and IT didn't LEAK.

 

Maybe IF they HAD brought A shovel THEY could've ESCAVATED down A bit FARTHER till THEY reached YOUR magical LEAK point?

It would have eventually leaked but they left before the failure in the six inch thick Plexiglas could become catastrophic. If I was in the Trieste after they passes 4921 fathoms I wouldn't have been dropping bricks, more like a concrete pylon from the Mackinaw bridge.

Challenger Deep is also the deepest surveyed point in the oceans at 5969 fathoms, there is a spot in the trench that is estimated to be about 6160 fathoms deep but that still leaves the statement "The Mariana Trench has the deepest known oceanic point on Earth" as true.

 

But then again this argument about deep enough is only as practical as a 4' steel sphere with 3' thick walls and friction welding the port shut.

 

To the OP:

I have seen Lock n Locks that are nested 4 deep right on the shelf and there are several that are bigger than the biggest in the set, so I'm sure that you could over kill it at least 6 deep if you wished.

But how much would you like to bet somebody will eventually leave a log like "Took a lock n lock left a beer tab".

[+Vater_Araignee]

Nothing and I mean NOTHING is 100% waterproof.

I say this because you take anything DEEP enough underwater and it will eventually leak.

I reckon THAT depends ON your DEFINITION of DEEP enough. WOULD being AS deep AS physically POSSIBLE count? I seem TO recall A certain VESSEL travelling TO the DEEPEST spot ON the PLANET, and IT didn't LEAK.

 

Maybe IF they HAD brought A shovel THEY could've ESCAVATED down A bit FARTHER till THEY reached YOUR magical LEAK point?

 

Actually if your refering to the deepest part of the ocean which is the "Marianas Trench" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench

 

If you do further research though, you will find that the 3 submersibles that went that deep were only rated to be able to go another 200 meters down before they would have reached what is known as "Crush" depth.

 

So yes, if they brought along a "pointy thing" and dug deeper. They could reach that magical point. The point I was trying to make is that in theory, true waterproofing doesn't exist. As the word would imply that it does. It's water resistance that we are after.

 

But I will give you points for at least being smart enough to know that we have at least on this planet so far, have been succesful in getting to the deepest part of the ocean without imploding.

TGC

Bad form!

You also dropped one r and one s.

[+texasgrillchef]

Nothing and I mean NOTHING is 100% waterproof.

I say this because you take anything DEEP enough underwater and it will eventually leak.

I reckon THAT depends ON your DEFINITION of DEEP enough. WOULD being AS deep AS physically POSSIBLE count? I seem TO recall A certain VESSEL travelling TO the DEEPEST spot ON the PLANET, and IT didn't LEAK.

 

Maybe IF they HAD brought A shovel THEY could've ESCAVATED down A bit FARTHER till THEY reached YOUR magical LEAK point?

 

Actually if your refering to the deepest part of the ocean which is the "Marianas Trench" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench

 

If you do further research though, you will find that the 3 submersibles that went that deep were only rated to be able to go another 200 meters down before they would have reached what is known as "Crush" depth.

 

So yes, if they brought along a "pointy thing" and dug deeper. They could reach that magical point. The point I was trying to make is that in theory, true waterproofing doesn't exist. As the word would imply that it does. It's water resistance that we are after.

 

But I will give you points for at least being smart enough to know that we have at least on this planet so far, have been succesful in getting to the deepest part of the ocean without imploding.

TGC

Bad form!

You also dropped one r and one s.

 

Im lost what are you refering too? The Trench is known as..."Marianas Trench" &/or/both "Mariana Trench"

 

TGC

[+Vater_Araignee]

Nothing and I mean NOTHING is 100% waterproof.

I say this because you take anything DEEP enough underwater and it will eventually leak.

I reckon THAT depends ON your DEFINITION of DEEP enough. WOULD being AS deep AS physically POSSIBLE count? I seem TO recall A certain VESSEL travelling TO the DEEPEST spot ON the PLANET, and IT didn't LEAK.

 

Maybe IF they HAD brought A shovel THEY could've ESCAVATED down A bit FARTHER till THEY reached YOUR magical LEAK point?

 

Actually if your refering to the deepest part of the ocean which is the "Marianas Trench" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench

 

If you do further research though, you will find that the 3 submersibles that went that deep were only rated to be able to go another 200 meters down before they would have reached what is known as "Crush" depth.

 

So yes, if they brought along a "pointy thing" and dug deeper. They could reach that magical point. The point I was trying to make is that in theory, true waterproofing doesn't exist. As the word would imply that it does. It's water resistance that we are after.

 

But I will give you points for at least being smart enough to know that we have at least on this planet so far, have been succesful in getting to the deepest part of the ocean without imploding.

TGC

Bad form!

You also dropped one r and one s.

 

Im lost what are you refering too? The Trench is known as..."Marianas Trench" &/or/both "Mariana Trench"

 

TGC

You wrote "Actually if your refering" referring has has a double R.

"have been succesful" successful has a double S.

I would have never mentioned it if you had not use a insult geared towards intelligence.

[+bittsen]

You wrote "Actually if your refering" referring has has a double R.

"have been succesful" successful has a double S.

I would have never mentioned it if you had not use a insult geared towards intelligence.

 

That last sentence you wrote doesn't sound right.

 

I would have never mentioned it if you had not used an insult geared towards intelligence.

I would have never mentioned it if you did not use an insult geared towards intelligence.

 

Either one of those would work.

 

Just sayin.......Mr. Pot

[+Vater_Araignee]

You wrote "Actually if your refering" referring has has a double R.

"have been succesful" successful has a double S.

I would have never mentioned it if you had not use a insult geared towards intelligence.

 

That last sentence you wrote doesn't sound right.

 

I would have never mentioned it if you had not used an insult geared towards intelligence.

I would have never mentioned it if you did not use an insult geared towards intelligence.

 

Either one of those would work.

 

Just sayin.......Mr. Pot

At least my spelling error is a word, I also should have used a comma between it and if.

I wasn't trying to insult somebodies smarts, just if you are going to do it you should be more careful, so to me my errors don't matter.

[+texasgrillchef]

You wrote "Actually if your refering" referring has has a double R.

"have been succesful" successful has a double S.

I would have never mentioned it if you had not use a insult geared towards intelligence.

 

That last sentence you wrote doesn't sound right.

 

I would have never mentioned it if you had not used an insult geared towards intelligence.

I would have never mentioned it if you did not use an insult geared towards intelligence.

 

Either one of those would work.

 

Just sayin.......Mr. Pot

At least my spelling error is a word, I also should have used a comma between it and if.

I wasn't trying to insult somebodies smarts, just if you are going to do it you should be more careful, so to me my errors don't matter.

 

My skills are with numbers. Thats the opposite of the brain than language skills. Can't remember if thats left or right brained. Whichever... I am the one that breezes through math & numbers, not words! Don't know if thats a good thing or bad. Might be good since Lat/Long are numbers.

 

TGC

[GOF and Bacall]

What was this thread about?