Translation into marketing lingo.............."Target Demographic"

Hey atlasman, YES, those companies do ask you to believe in their products. They can list all the studies they want. You read all the data you want. And you can listen to all of the first hand accounts that you want but if you don't believe the studies, data, and accounts than you still won't buy their products.
Also, why do you expect us to believeyour, and others "experience," and then bash us for believingthe actual field experience of those that say that the suits work. Call me crazy but if I talk to people who have 10, 20,or 30+ years hunting and they tell me that they see more deer and spook fewer of them, I am going to believe it because they have been there and done that.
So yes, no matter what the evidence for or against, you do have to believe in something to buy it, and please stop bashing people who trust and rely on the experience of others who have spent countless hours in the woods "testing" products. If it helps me kill a deer, it passes my test.

Boy, this is a great post.

For me, I don't put much faith in scent lock suits. I don't believe anything can contain human scent, or any scent for that matter.Now I do believe the technology in the suits works,I don't think anyone is denying that activated carbon will absorb scent.BUT until somebody....anybody can show me once and for all scientific proof that these suits can be "regenerated" in a home dryer,how cananyone be 100% sure?

Those of you who have told stories of your deer kills and especially those who have had much success doing it, you are selling yourselves short and doing a great injustice to your skills as a hunters. I believe your success came from your knowledge of the whitetail and not the clothes on your back.

I have never considered myself a "great hunter" But I have done good over the years. I have killed a deer every year for as long as I remember (mid 80's). I am on a buck run of at least one every year since 1994. Ten years in a row with at least one buck kill. (some years more) not all with a bow and not all P&Y either.

The point I'm trying to make is I have never ever wore a scent lock suit and I have had adeer less than 5 feet from me one time when I was on the ground (gun hunting). I have had deer upwind, downwind and everywhere in between that never scented me. How is this possible? I'm serious, how can it be that a deer walked right past me and never knew I was there while I was sitting on the ground with my back to a tree? The wind was blowing from my left to right and I was looking up wind when all of a sudden out of the corner of my eye I see him. He was walking directly into the wind and my scent and the darn thing almost tripped over my legs. It wasby far my easiest kill and a big 8 point no less. (about 120in, I never measured) Then sometimes It seemed like they could smell me 200yds away. Why?

If you want to believe in scent lock garments go right ahead, on paper and in studies it works. But it has it's flaws and questions,the biggestbeing "can it be regenerated?" Personally I don't think it can, and I also believe most of the garments are "full" before you even get them home. There are too many very knowledgeable people including some on this very forum saying it can't be regenerated without very high temps that I don't think I can dismiss them without solid scientific proof............I haven't heard or read ityet.

All I'm getting is alot of smoke and mirrors.

You're missing the point.........The companies I listed don't ask you to "believe" anything.......it just is what it is. It can all be verified easily. Scent suits ask you to "believe" that they are keeping you scent free. Can you verify that?.........Can they? They want you to "believe" that the suits are "regenerated" in a dryer yet can you verify that??........Can they??

Field experiences are so random and have a million variables to each case that they are not reliable to use as proof one way or the other. For every guy that raves about a great product and his experience you can find someone else to say it is junk. Really is a waste of time trying to prove a point based on something that happened to a guy someday out in some woods somewhere and think that somehow relates to a reliable prediction of expected outcomes.


That is not true.........when something can be easily proven it doesn't have to be "believed".......it just is. I don't care whether you "believe" in gravity or not......if you hop out of your treestand you are gonna experience it first hand........it just is.


I'm not bashing them..........I'm just pointing out the futility in such a venture.


If you could prove that it did then I would agree with that statement.

No $hit!

I bought a ScentLok liner when they first came out. There was a small booth at a Hunting show in Virginia and I layed down the cash. I wore it for a few years, and bought a second one so I wouldn't have to wash them that much (back then they were not very durable).

In my *experience* with the suit...it *DO* work. I had too many situations where I sooooo should have been busted and was not..sweating my ass off...downwind...situations where I could say nothing other than the famous Sherlock Holmes quote.



That said, I don't believe they eliminate scent entirely, nor do I think they can let ya hunt day in and day outdownwind all day long after walking 20 miles and eating a few cans of baked beans and some sauerkraut. But I feel based on my experience that they are effective.

Atlasman,

1. We showed you that results on that graph because that is what the test shows. Plain and simple. We only omitted information that is confidential.

2. I told you how the test was done and what equipment does it.

3. They are your lone opinions. You were the only one on fifteen different chat boards to bring in the article about dogs and boxes. That is attributed only to you. And If I recall correctly you said in the post that you linked it to that you searched for it. And again, that dog and boxes is not a very valid study by any means! And again, for too many times now, that graph is what the raw data shows.

4. Great atlasman you made your opinion available for weeks now. Thanks for your lone opinion.

5. Because you want to see testing data not funded be us. So I provided the tools and methods to do it. Again, if you want to fund it and try it at home, go for it. Nothing snide here.

6. Yup, but as above you can read about the techniques and understand fully how we do test.

7. Because the dog is not a studay of merit and you hold a lot of weight in it; and it means nothing.

8. Fine, then don't believe and go away. Again the charts and grphs are the factual data tha tonly omits confidential information. And agin take my wor for it.

9. I think I covered this many times.

Your second post of the night:

1. After twenty washings the bonding agent begins to break down due to the washing process.

Your third post of the night:

1. What other philosophy is there. Continue on and on forever and yeild nothing?

2. Huh? Uh... yes. You better believe in the strength of yur stand, and the speed of your bow and the waterproofness of your boots. I believe the airbag works in my car even though I have never seen it. I believe that the airplane slide will work when I open up the emerengcy door. I guess I really don't understand what you are implying here.

Your fourth post of the night:

1. Did I hear someone say snide remark?

Your fifth post of the night:

1. Uh...I think I already addressed this.

2. Yet your dog and box "study" is valid. Hmmmm, sounds like you just totally discredited your own "study".

3. And if you put regenerated activated carbon between your nose and a mint and can't smell the mint, it just is. Try it at home!

4. No atlasman you are indeed bashing. Like you fourth post, that wasn't bashing? Hmmmmm

5. Again, look at the graph. Ha ha!! Just poking fun. I don't think you will ever agree.

No we never claim to be 100% But we do bring it down below a threshold to where you will be basically unnoticed.

Like was said in a previous posts. if you don't believe in it don't freakin' buy it! I happen to believe that it works so I'll continue to buy it. It's my money that I earned and I don't think it's anybody's place to tell me how to spend it. I have actually seen nothing from you that disproves it's effectiveness, just a bunch of rhetoric.

atlasman,
I did not read all the post on this thread as I am already in my 40's and would rather spend the rest of my limited time on earth doing other things so this point may have been settled.
I am currently a Navy Deep Sea Diver and have been for longer then most people on this site have been alive. We( as does NASA)do to this day use activated charcoalin varrious forms to filter ourlife support system breathinggases inconventional, high pressure oxygen,and saturation diving systems.
We do not use heat to reactivate them but rather replace them at around 200 - 1000 hours of use depending on the canister type and construction. I can tell you this, the ability of charcoal to removegasses andvapor particles from the surrounding atmosphere is well scientifically provenand not to mention absolutely necessary in the world of deep sea diving and space exploration.
Agas or vapor thatposesno danger to the human bodyon the surface (1 atmosphere)will become lethalas greater depths or increases in pressure are reached ( Dalton Law).It is this absorbsion quality of charcoal that we trust our lives with every time we enter a pressurized atmosphere.
The way charcoal is cleansed of human scent molocules by moderate heat such as a household dryeris basedoff the combonation of several basic physics laws. To keep it barney simple, put a coke can in the trunk of you car on a hot day. The can will begin to expand as the gas moloculesin thecoke heats up and begin to move. This is the same theory behind the sent molocules being heated up and therefore put into action which dislodges them from the surface of the charcoal.
It may not remove or dislodge all of the scent molocules but it will remove a vast majority of them as they are only attached to the surface irregularities of the charcoal not actually absorbed by them.
It was not that long ago that people believed that the world was flat. Because we do not fully understand something does not make it un-true.

So like I said..........the only option is to take your word for it. You paid for the study but they won't let you publish the results..........why would any company do a study if they knew they couldn't publish the results??

I wonder if General Motors or Ford or JD Power or Consumer Reports would hide their methods of testing when asked.............how many people would feel comfortable buying a car with a high safety rating if they were told "Sorry........we can't tell you anything more then it got 5 stars" Good Luck.


You did nothing even remotely close. You listed a method and some equipment. What were the conditions? What materials were used? What was the time frame? Was the scent coctail uniform and consistent? How many samples were run? There are about 100 other questions about what you used to come up with your little line graph.

You know very well that in the scientific community a line graph is meaningless. You would get laughed out of the room if you just put a graph up and were unwilling to describe the methods used to obtain those results..............that is precisely why they have peer review of studies before they get published...............it insures that proper proceedures and methods were used and therefore the reliability of the resulting data.


Wrong..........I didn't even know the study existed.........I clicked on a google link to a Nebraska Outdoor forum debate on scent suits.

I wasn't talking about my opinions on the dog study


It's more valid then your line graph.............at least we know more about his study then the "results".......and he isn't selling anything.

Again..........you wouldn't be here if you thought my opinion was lone. Read this very thread and many others on this forum and you will find many people that share my thoughts on carbon suits.

There is nothing snide about making bold claims to consumers that go against scientific logic and then telling them when they have questions "If you don't like it.........test it yourself"???

That's a good one.............run it by your PR department........you may have a new slogan on your hands


You must be kidding..........the details of your study should take up pages of theory, proceedure, results, conclusions etc..........you listed two lines of text.


I hold more weight in it then your line graph for many reasons.

He is not selling me anything.
He listed his methods.
He listed his results.
He talked about variables that effected the study.
He used live animals that are used to smell yet still have less ability then a deer.
He had nothing to gain from the study either way.

You........posted a line graph and said "Trust me"


Nothing snide there What's the matter?? Don't like when consumers ask educated questions?

I know, I know.......you have said it 100 times...........I am still waiting for you to prove it just once.

Please elaborate...........with a link to the study if possible.

Ask for proof...........especially when the claims of a product go against basic laws of science.

All those companies can prove everything they say their products can do.........and a hunter can verify them himself if he so chooses. Scent suits require bilnd faith in your line graph and a disreguard for the science of carbon. A hunter has no choice but to "believe" his suit is working because there is absolutely no way for him to know for sure.......there is no way to know if it is "full" or half "full" or working at all........there is no way to know if it is regenerated or not........there is no way to know if it ever worked even from day one.

Buy a pair of Rocky boots and go step in a puddle.......that's more proof then any carbon suit could ever provide. Shoot your bow through a chrono and you KNOW what it can do.


You must be joking...........what an insult to the intelligence of hunters everywhere. That is what you offer as proof that a deer won't smell you in the woods?? Wow.


I looked at the graph.............what would you say if I made a line graph that showed scent suits didn't work at all??........I bet you would want to know what I did to come up with that data and you would be screaming from the hilltops that it is bogus.......Yet that is all you have done here is show a graph and say "Believe me"