Cache Inflation

[+the4dirtydogs]

Who really cares what size they are

I do. Many of my peers do as well. If you hold to the notion that "Every Cache Is Sacred" (which, incidentally could make for a good Monty Python skit, if you could get school kids to sing it), that's fine. You cache however you see fit. Lots of other cachers actually have preferences.

DRAMA

Hardly. Clan Riffster speaks for many of us, that's why there are so many micro discussions on the forums. Believing that eveyone likes every size cache would suggest to me that you are sticking your head in the sand.

I never said anything about everyone liking all size caches. Just said who cares just go find them. Maybe you need to get your head out of the sand.

[+L0ne.R]

Who really cares what size they are

I do. Many of my peers do as well. If you hold to the notion that "Every Cache Is Sacred" (which, incidentally could make for a good Monty Python skit, if you could get school kids to sing it), that's fine. You cache however you see fit. Lots of other cachers actually have preferences.

DRAMA

Hardly. Clan Riffster speaks for many of us, that's why there are so many micro discussions on the forums. Believing that eveyone likes every size cache would suggest to me that you are sticking your head in the sand.

I never said anything about everyone liking all size caches. Just said who cares just go find them. Maybe you need to get your head out of the sand.

 

Well you said "who cares?", that would suggest you are ignoring all the forum threads that point out that lots of people care. Or you are saying that people shouldn't care - i.e. you believe every cache is a gem and so should everyone else. It's true that for some people geocaching is finding a piece of paper at a set of coordinates and that's enough for them, but it's not enough for many of us.

[+sbell111]

Sometimes it's better to change the way that we interact with the world, rather than to expect the world to change for us. It is also helpful to recognize that often times, other people like things that we do not and that this is natural and not a symptom of a problem.

Edited September 21, 2010 by sbell111

[+slukster]

I have a cache container that I have always been on the fence as to whether it is a micro or a small:

Beach Safe

 

It fits the description of "holds trade items as well as a log book" (I could of sworn it used to say "holds small trade items") but I never thought to try and measure its volume to figure out if it satisfies the guideline of being more than 3 ounces or .1 L. Here is a picture of the beach safe next to a standard bison tube as well as a larger "bison" tube I came across:

 

 

I didn't have a film can to put in the picture for comparison but with the nano being considered a micro along with the film can and bison tube, I find it hard to list this beach safe as a micro considering it is much larger than a film can or bison tube. Now the larger bison tube pictured I would still list as a micro.

 

For the most part, when I have used the beach safe and listed it as a small, I have either provided a pic or given a description of the container on the cache page so that someone who might consider it a micro won't be upset that I "inflated" the cache size.

[Mr.Yuck]

I have a cache container that I have always been on the fence as to whether it is a micro or a small:

Beach Safe

 

It fits the description of "holds trade items as well as a log book" (I could of sworn it used to say "holds small trade items") but I never thought to try and measure its volume to figure out if it satisfies the guideline of being more than 3 ounces or .1 L. Here is a picture of the beach safe next to a standard bison tube as well as a larger "bison" tube I came across:

 

I didn't have a film can to put in the picture for comparison but with the nano being considered a micro along with the film can and bison tube, I find it hard to list this beach safe as a micro considering it is much larger than a film can or bison tube. Now the larger bison tube pictured I would still list as a micro.

 

For the most part, when I have used the beach safe and listed it as a small, I have either provided a pic or given a description of the container on the cache page so that someone who might consider it a micro won't be upset that I "inflated" the cache size.

 

Oh goody. I get to put my geekyness to use. It's a cylinder. It's volume (in cubic inches) is expressed by Pi*r^2*h or Pi*d^2*h/4. Then 1 cubic inche = 0.554112554 US fluid ounces.

 

Of course it's tapered, but using the diameter of the middle should work just fine.

[GOF and Bacall]

And then remember that it is "approximately 3oz." So if it works out to 3.1 oz. I'd still list it as a micro. A small is a sandwich sized container and I don't think that fits.

 

On a side note. Most of those I have found have had a crack or two in them. The ones I usually see are a brittle plastic.

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

That beach container is about the size of my plastic spice jar! i would consider it small. To me micro is 35mm film can or smaller (bison tubes).

[+slukster]

On a side note. Most of those I have found have had a crack or two in them. The ones I usually see are a brittle plastic.

Yeah, they really aren't the greatest containers but I think I bought a lot of 40 of them last year so I will be using them for a while. The biggest issue with them is that the threads don't match up all of the time when screwing the parts together. I replace the o-ring since the OEM rings deteriorate rather quickly.

[GOF and Bacall]

That beach container is about the size of my plastic spice jar! i would consider it small. To me micro is 35mm film can or smaller (bison tubes).

I still think they are closer to the description of a micro than that of a small. A sandwich that would fit in there wouldn't be very filling.

 

On a side note. Most of those I have found have had a crack or two in them. The ones I usually see are a brittle plastic.

Yeah, they really aren't the greatest containers but I think I bought a lot of 40 of them last year so I will be using them for a while. The biggest issue with them is that the threads don't match up all of the time when screwing the parts together. I replace the o-ring since the OEM rings deteriorate rather quickly.

At least you have plenty of parts for maintenance runs.

[Mr.Yuck]

On a side note. Most of those I have found have had a crack or two in them. The ones I usually see are a brittle plastic.

Yeah, they really aren't the greatest containers but I think I bought a lot of 40 of them last year so I will be using them for a while. The biggest issue with them is that the threads don't match up all of the time when screwing the parts together. I replace the o-ring since the OEM rings deteriorate rather quickly.

 

If you're still around, humor me and give me the diameter where it comes apart, and the length, both in inches, so I can do my geeky calculation. The post above yours that I'm quoting mentions it's about the same size as a spice jar. However, I thought it was established that most spice jars are 2 ounces, and fall under micro. Unless she's talking about some super-sized spice jar, and I missed it.

[+roziecakes]

Who really cares what size they are

I do. Many of my peers do as well. If you hold to the notion that "Every Cache Is Sacred" (which, incidentally could make for a good Monty Python skit, if you could get school kids to sing it), that's fine. You cache however you see fit. Lots of other cachers actually have preferences.

 

What Riffster says is true. There are people who care. I personally don't mind finding different sizes of caches, I like 'em all usually. BUT, I do think that the size should be properly labeled on the cache page. That will make the cache easily filterable by everyone. There are people who filter by size, and that's fine. They should be able to, as accurately as possible.

[+slukster]

If you're still around, humor me and give me the diameter where it comes apart, and the length, both in inches, so I can do my geeky calculation. The post above yours that I'm quoting mentions it's about the same size as a spice jar. However, I thought it was established that most spice jars are 2 ounces, and fall under micro. Unless she's talking about some super-sized spice jar, and I missed it.

The internal dimensions are 4" long and 1 1/8" in diameter. Work your magic, Mr. Geek.

[+niraD]

The beach safe I just measured has a volume of about 2.5oz or 75ml. That's less than the "3 ounces or .1 L" in the guidelines, but about twice the volume of the 35mm film canister that I just measured (about 1.2oz or 35ml).

 

IME, the cheap beach safes fail quickly. The obvious failure is the cheap O ring, which can be replaced. But often, the plastic of the beach safe is pretty flimsy too.

 

High quality beach safes do well though.

[+the4dirtydogs]

Who really cares what size they are

I do. Many of my peers do as well. If you hold to the notion that "Every Cache Is Sacred" (which, incidentally could make for a good Monty Python skit, if you could get school kids to sing it), that's fine. You cache however you see fit. Lots of other cachers actually have preferences.

 

What Riffster says is true. There are people who care. I personally don't mind finding different sizes of caches, I like 'em all usually. BUT, I do think that the size should be properly labeled on the cache page. That will make the cache easily filterable by everyone. There are people who filter by size, and that's fine. They should be able to, as accurately as possible.

I understand people filter out caches by size, I'm just saying it shouldn't matter. If your caching for a small and you find micro your not going to die. I agree that the Inflation comes from not knowing and deception. We have preferences also, we try to find as many as we can. It's all about the numbers- # of people you meet, # of awesome places you get to see, # of caches and most of all the number of good times!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[+the4dirtydogs]

Who really cares what size they are

I do. Many of my peers do as well. If you hold to the notion that "Every Cache Is Sacred" (which, incidentally could make for a good Monty Python skit, if you could get school kids to sing it), that's fine. You cache however you see fit. Lots of other cachers actually have preferences.

DRAMA

Hardly. Clan Riffster speaks for many of us, that's why there are so many micro discussions on the forums. Believing that eveyone likes every size cache would suggest to me that you are sticking your head in the sand.

I never said anything about everyone liking all size caches. Just said who cares just go find them. Maybe you need to get your head out of the sand.

 

Well you said "who cares?", that would suggest you are ignoring all the forum threads that point out that lots of people care. Or you are saying that people shouldn't care - i.e. you believe every cache is a gem and so should everyone else. It's true that for some people geocaching is finding a piece of paper at a set of coordinates and that's enough for them, but it's not enough for many of us.

You don't know me and you don't know how I cache. I've cached in many places and have found many caches. So don't play these games with me. I'll say it again if you find a cache mis- labeled your not going to die. It's just a game. Cache On.

Edited September 22, 2010 by the4dirtydogs

[Mr.Yuck]

If you're still around, humor me and give me the diameter where it comes apart, and the length, both in inches, so I can do my geeky calculation. The post above yours that I'm quoting mentions it's about the same size as a spice jar. However, I thought it was established that most spice jars are 2 ounces, and fall under micro. Unless she's talking about some super-sized spice jar, and I missed it.

The internal dimensions are 4" long and 1 1/8" in diameter. Work your magic, Mr. Geek.

 

Well, NiraD already came up with it. But I actually get even less for yours, 2.203 Ounces! So, it's a micro!!

 

I'm thinking I've only found about 5 or 6 of those there things, and I can say pretty confidently that every one of them was listed as a small.

[+dfx]

well, strictly speaking, the guidelines say "less than approximately 3 ounces". if i'm not mistaken, ounces is a measurement for weight/mass, not volume, isn't it?

[Mr.Yuck]

well, strictly speaking, the guidelines say "less than approximately 3 ounces". if i'm not mistaken, ounces is a measurement for weight/mass, not volume, isn't it?

 

Well, yep. Can't argue with that. OK Slukster, just measure out 3 ounces of water in a measuring cup, and see if you can fit it all in there.

[Andronicus]

I found one today listed as a small, but realy was a regular, or maybe even a large.

[Andronicus]

well, strictly speaking, the guidelines say "less than approximately 3 ounces". if i'm not mistaken, ounces is a measurement for weight/mass, not volume, isn't it?

I am a metric guy from Canada, but I think ounce can be either weight/mass, or volume. I think there is a standard for both.

[+niraD]

If I hadn't measured the containers, I wouldn't have known that the beach safe volume matches the description for a micro. But I'm not good at judging how many ounces or milliliters a container holds, so when I read "35 mm film canister or smaller – less than approximately 3 ounces or .1 L", the part that sticks is "35 mm film canister or smaller", and the beach safe looks twice as big as a 35 mm film canister. And the beach safe caches I've found have generally been listed as small, not micro.

[Clan Riffster]

I'll say it again if you find a cache mis- labeled your not going to die.

Now who's being a drama queen?

Yes, it's true. I would probably survive if I located a micro whilst hunting a small. Is death the only standard by which we can measure things by? If someone stabs me in the foot with a frozen lemming, I probably won't die. Should I just shrug and move on? Your determined defense of those goobers who either don't know they are mislabelling their caches, (can't be bothered with reading silly guidelines), or don't care that they are mislabelling their caches, vexes me. I just don't get it.

 

You've got your preferences, and we all respect them.

 

Yet, when our preferences include accuracy, you tell us "Get over it".

[+the4dirtydogs]

I'll say it again if you find a cache mis- labeled your not going to die.

Now who's being a drama queen?

Yes, it's true. I would probably survive if I located a micro whilst hunting a small. Is death the only standard by which we can measure things by? If someone stabs me in the foot with a frozen lemming, I probably won't die. Should I just shrug and move on? Your determined defense of those goobers who either don't know they are mislabelling their caches, (can't be bothered with reading silly guidelines), or don't care that they are mislabelling their caches, vexes me. I just don't get it.

 

You've got your preferences, and we all respect them.

 

Yet, when our preferences include accuracy, you tell us "Get over it".

Sheez man you don't quit. LMAO Later RICHARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[+sbell111]

On a side note. Most of those I have found have had a crack or two in them. The ones I usually see are a brittle plastic.

Yeah, they really aren't the greatest containers but I think I bought a lot of 40 of them last year so I will be using them for a while. The biggest issue with them is that the threads don't match up all of the time when screwing the parts together. I replace the o-ring since the OEM rings deteriorate rather quickly.

 

If you're still around, humor me and give me the diameter where it comes apart, and the length, both in inches, so I can do my geeky calculation. The post above yours that I'm quoting mentions it's about the same size as a spice jar. However, I thought it was established that most spice jars are 2 ounces, and fall under micro. Unless she's talking about some super-sized spice jar, and I missed it.

That hasn't been established, at all. Someone erroneously assumed that because a spice jar that they had a pic of originally held 2 ounces of a spice. Sadly, the individual didn't catch that it was two ounces by weight and that the volume of the container was, therefore, obviously quite a bit larger then 2 ounces.

[+L0ne.R]

If you're still around, humor me and give me the diameter where it comes apart, and the length, both in inches, so I can do my geeky calculation. The post above yours that I'm quoting mentions it's about the same size as a spice jar. However, I thought it was established that most spice jars are 2 ounces, and fall under micro. Unless she's talking about some super-sized spice jar, and I missed it.

That hasn't been established, at all. Someone erroneously assumed that because a spice jar that they had a pic of originally held 2 ounces of a spice. Sadly, the individual didn't catch that it was two ounces by weight and that the volume of the container was, therefore, obviously quite a bit larger then 2 ounces.

 

I'm near the kitchen now so I can actually do some measuring. I have this spice jar (I would say this size is the average size of a spice jar):

 

 

It measures 4" tall and it's opening is 1". Someone do the math please. Micro or Small?

 

 

I also have a large jar of this Club House spice:

 

 

It measures 5" tall and 1 3/4" at the opening. Micro or small?

[Clan Riffster]

Sheez man you don't quit. LMAO Later RICHARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Richard"? Seriously? The drama queen raises her tiara again? One must wonder how very sad it is to be you. If you wish to attempt contributing something of merit to this conversation, I'd love to discuss your views on caching with you. However, if all you are capable of is sophomoric insults, not unlike young girls in Junior High schools across the country, then please, do us all a favor and back away from your keyboard. Many members are truly interested in this topic, and your off topic rants are getting tedious. Silliness like this should stay in PMs.

[+roziecakes]

I think that technically a spice jar qualifies as a small, since it's larger than a film can, but I think I would probably still call it a micro. When in doubt, I round down a size. I own a few caches that some might consider to be a regular, but because the size guidelines state 'ammo can or rubbermaid' they don't really size up, so I call them a small, and comment on the cache page that they are larger smalls. In other words, they would fit most TBs and a good amount of swag.

 

Hope this is a kosher practice...

[+roziecakes]

Sometimes it's better to change the way that we interact with the world, rather than to expect the world to change for us. It is also helpful to recognize that often times, other people like things that we do not and that this is natural and not a symptom of a problem.

 

I love what you said. Can I use it in my signature?

[+L0ne.R]

 

 

It measures 4" tall and it's opening is 1".

 

Found an online calculator...I get 3.1 cubic inches

3.1 in³ = 1.71774 fl oz(US)

Micro

 

 

It measures 5" tall and 1 3/4" at the opening.

11 cubic inches

11 in³ = 6.09523 fl oz(US)

Small

[naturelovers!]

I've been reading a lot of back and forth about "Who cares about the size". I understand many people genuinely DON'T care about the size, but there are lots who do.

 

I thought I'd share my perspective as mother geocaching with my little girl.

 

Geocaching is a hobby I do strictly with my 8-year-old daughter, because I love to see the excitement of her discovering the cache, and eagerly opening it to see what treasures it holds inside.

 

It is SUCH a disappointment for her to go for the hunt, only to discover the "small" cache, which generally means there is at least some SWAG, is in fact a micro with no prizes for her inside.

 

For us, I do tend to avoid the micros, because I know they cause a lot of disappointment for my little girl.

 

I do hope people will take this into concideration next time they place a cache, and not intentionally artificially inflate the cache size.

 

Thanks!

[+DragonsWest]

My rule of thumb -

 

Nano - Smaller than film can

Micro - Smaller than Altoids tin

Small - A decon or smaller

Medium - smaller than an Ammo can

Large - Ammo can to bucket (and beyond)

[+SwineFlew]

In the end, any sizes equal to one smiley.

[+briansnat]

My rule of thumb -

 

Nano - Smaller than film can

Micro - Smaller than Altoids tin

Small - A decon or smaller

Medium - smaller than an Ammo can

Large - Ammo can to bucket (and beyond)

 

There is no nano size. Ammo cans are properly rated as regular. Why not just use the sizes as stated in the guidelines?

 

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

 

Small (sandwich-sized plastic container or similar – less than approximately 1 quart or 1 L – holds trade items as well as a logbook)

 

Regular (plastic container or ammo can about the size of a shoebox)

 

Large (5 gallon/20 L bucket or larger)

[+L0ne.R]

In the end, any sizes equal to one smiley.

 

That thought is fine if you are a finder but an unfortunate sentiment if you are a CO and putting out caches simply to provide a smiley, with no other redeeming value.

[+L0ne.R]

Small (sandwich-sized plastic container or similar – less than approximately 1 quart or 1 L – holds trade items as well as a logbook)

 

I agree. And I'll add, please remember that a small can hold trade items. If you leave out a pencil because a pencil won't fit then there's no room for swag and it's a micro.

[+briansnat]

Small (sandwich-sized plastic container or similar – less than approximately 1 quart or 1 L – holds trade items as well as a logbook)

 

I agree. And I'll add, please remember that a small can hold trade items. If you leave out a pencil because a pencil won't fit then there's no room for swag and it's a micro.

 

I've often hidden micros with swag, so I wouldn't use whether you can fit swag in it as a measure.

[GOF and Bacall]

I think we should use the "McToy standard". If you can't put the average McToy in it it is a micro.

[+L0ne.R]

Small (sandwich-sized plastic container or similar – less than approximately 1 quart or 1 L – holds trade items as well as a logbook)

 

I agree. And I'll add, please remember that a small can hold trade items. If you leave out a pencil because a pencil won't fit then there's no room for swag and it's a micro.

 

I've often hidden micros with swag, so I wouldn't use whether you can fit swag in it as a measure.

 

I see your point. Some micros (like film canisters) have enough room for a couple of small coins about the size of a penny. But I would argue that if the container is too small for even a small pencil then the container should not be listed as a small but as a micro.

[+sbell111]

Sometimes it's better to change the way that we interact with the world, rather than to expect the world to change for us. It is also helpful to recognize that often times, other people like things that we do not and that this is natural and not a symptom of a problem.

 

I love what you said. Can I use it in my signature?

sure

[+roziecakes]

Sometimes it's better to change the way that we interact with the world, rather than to expect the world to change for us. It is also helpful to recognize that often times, other people like things that we do not and that this is natural and not a symptom of a problem.

 

I love what you said. Can I use it in my signature?

sure

 

Thank you

[+slukster]

I have a cache container that I have always been on the fence as to whether it is a micro or a small:

Beach Safe

 

It fits the description of "holds trade items as well as a log book" (I could of sworn it used to say "holds small trade items") but I never thought to try and measure its volume to figure out if it satisfies the guideline of being more than 3 ounces or .1 L. Here is a picture of the beach safe next to a standard bison tube as well as a larger "bison" tube I came across:

So I broke out the measuring cup, filled the beach safe container with water, and figured it to hold just under 3 ounces of water. Now that I have proven to myself that it can be listed as a micro, I will now use the guideline saying that a micro is a 35mm film canister or smaller so I can leave it listed as a small. LOL