It is about the numbers !

[Team Honeybunnies]

Not to hijack the thread, but I believe we are overdue for another visit with the Echoes also. Have kayak, will travel.

[ForeFeathers]

“Have kayak, will travel.”
Cool. Looking forward to this.

[draconis dave]

I have 3994 within 100 miles.

But here’s the math:

100 mile radius, taking away 1/2 for Lake Michigan, is 15708 square miles.

Taking the amount of caches, I end up with about 1 cache every 4 square miles. Imagine, if they were evenly spaced, every cache would be 2 miles apart from each other. I don’t know what else you could compare that to, but when some people say there may be too many caches, a 2 mile average spacing dosen’t seem too tight.

Yes, have too much time and math skills for my own good.

[marc_54140]

Oooh! OoooHHH! I’m making progress!

Current stats show – 795 unfiltered
129 filtered.

Big difference!

[Pto]

3073 within 100 miles of 54853 (Luck, WI)
but that # is very skewed- 100 mile radius covers a Lot of MN to the W, so its pretty inaccurate. Within the first 14 miles, I begin to see Mn caches….

I used a 50 mile radius, and got about 700 (minus appx 20 mn caches)

Thats a TON more than were around when I began – Im excited by the growth in WI caches!

PS- If you access caches in your area from “My account” page- I beleive I read recently that the default is now 50 miles.

If you access cache searching from the Hide & seek a cache page, you can manually give it a radius.

[This message has been edited by Pto (edited 04-17-2006).]

[This message has been edited by Pto (edited 04-17-2006).]

[Author]

Posts