Cman

I read thru the article linked below yesterday for the first time, and since I am/was in the market for new camo, have been considering the implications. Scent elimination clothing & products are very expensive, and many peoples are paying a premium for these products. Now I' m wondering whether they work at all?!?

The crux of the argument is activation. Can anyone support the theory one way or another? The gentleman who wrote the article doesn' t seem to have any axe to grind, but he does have a degree in Science & a lot of experience with Activated Charcoal. What gives? Please post your thoughts.

Cman

http://www.fastestbows.com/articles/...cent_suits.htm

benhuntin

The man who wrote the article is a friend of mine that works with the same City government as I do. Mike is very intellegent and knowledgeable but he forgot to do one thing before he wrote the article. TEST IT OUT FOR HIMSELF. I did test these out over the past three years. My conclusion is they DO work at first but the effectiveness drops dramatically after the first season of use. By the second year I put mine in the closet for good. I firmly believe that these suits cannot be fully reactivated using the proposed dryer method and overtime, one to two seasons they are basically useless. Look at all the other carbon filters on the market used for various things including the military issued carbon suits. ALL are disposable. Why cant we reactivate these? The manufacturers of these carbon hunting suits dont state HOW LONG these garments are effective. For good reason. SALES.
The other manufactures of the scent reducing chemical imbedded hunting clothes state that the effectiveness is good for the life of the garment. I personally wouldnt buy another set of these carbon suits. However Ive heard some on these forums swear by them. NOt from my experience.

Cman

I found a reply over on Archery Talk in a thread on this very issue. See below.

Buckskin73 wrote:

" I read the article. Informative. But I too work in the environmental industry. I too got a bachelors degree in Biology and a minor in chemistry. I also have a chemical engineering degree. Here is what I know.

Most of his scientific data is accurate. The manufacturing process and intended uses are all legitimate. Here is the real deal. The purpose of pyrolisis is to heat the " stink" molecules to the boiling point. In other words you have to turn the " stink" molecule from a liquid or solid into a gas.

Here is the problem with the theory of the lack of effectiveness. Most of the organic compounds that are being trapped in the carbon are by nature volatile ( which means they can be turned to a vapor relatively easy at ambient temperature and pressure). That is why deer can smell them. They have to be in the form of a gas to reach the deers noses. If these molecules are being vaporized while you hunt then a drier will do the same. Now we also have to take into account the affectiveness of carbon to hold organics. That bound is extremely weak though.

Here is my proposal. I will take my own carbon suit I will expose it to 3 organic compounds with varying vapor pressures ( or volatility). I will then take one peice of clothing and heat it in the drier for a predisposed period of time. I will also keep one peice of clothing unheated. I will wash both with a heated solvent to remove all the organic material and run the solvent wash through a gas chromatograph. This will tell me very low concentrations of organics. I will post my results when I get done. I hope I can have this done by the end of next week.

I might be wrong........we will see."

I will wait to see more info. before I drop >$300 beans.

kevin1

I use Army MOPP suits , and they do work temporarily , but I dispose of them after the season ends . No , you can' t " reactivate" a carbon suit in a home dryer , it doesn' t get anywhere near hot enough . Any suit containing activated carbon should be considered disposable no matter what ScentLok says , they only want to sell you a suit .