GMMAT

They practiced scent control by utilizing mud .......and capes from animals taken. They broke up their outlines with paint. They were the ORIGINATORS of camouflage and scent control.

gutshot

All that I can add to this thread is that I see enough deer to do me without having to drop another $150.00-$200.00 on Scent Lock so I guess that I'm going to stick with my unlined coveralls.

GMMAT

Yeah but would you be MORE successful if you had a $600 suit from Gray Wolf Woolens and Predator? (Don....I promise I'm not making fun of you or anything of the sort. I'm trying to prove a point. I think the suit is awesome).

If the answer is "Yes"......then PROVE IT. NO testimonials.....I need PROOF.

hardcorehunter

The gray wolf woolens I spent money on is about warmth, quietness, windproof, burr proof, and water repellency all in one fabric. Wolfskin is the cats meow and is the only material that I have seen and touched that is able to do all of the above. You usually give up quietness in a fabric when you try to get all of the above. I just can't see why people keep comparing products that we can see, feel, touch, and use to a product like carbon that is based on none of the above; it is based strictly on science and if science would confirm that the carbon can be reactivated/regenerated in my dryer I will buy some and stand on the highest mountain and praise the product for all to hear. I am still waiting for someone from the carbon companies to explain how their carbon is able to be reactivated/regenerated in a homeowners' dryer when all of the companies that specialize in carbon reactivation emphacize that it requires high heat and steam. I see the carbon clothing manufactureers on this thread and on the thread I have at AT, but they just lurk and won't get on here and explain why their carbon can do what other carbon companies carbon can't. They read my posts and but just ignore our questions.

GMMAT

Ya'll have a great weekend.....

BTW.....I paid less than 1/3 (if $600 is the "standard") for my scentblocker items......and they did just fine. I'm not making fun of you, Don.....I just find it ironic that "I've" been accused of being "duped" (along with others who purchase scentblocker products). I bought my scentblocker items......and had enough left over to buy my Allegiance.

If I ever DID feel "duped" (I didn't) .....I sure don't now!

gutshot

I paid $49.99 for my coveralls and I kill all of the deer that I can eat.[:-]

archer58

Don,
PM sent

atlasman

That's the funny thing about this subject......it's always anecdotal evidence that people fall back on instead of the facts.

The phrases "I believe"......."faith"........"convinced".......an d so on are found quite often in threads like these......instead of factual evidence.

This is a study published in a peer reviewed journal conducted using the scientific method that shows carbon suits did not help contain human scent.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ws/nwrc/is/02pubs/shiv024.pdf

These are links showing that Intertek (the lab used in the "study" you posted earlier) was fined 9 million dollars for falsifying results.

http://www.mindfully.org/Water/2003/Labs-Fake-Tests22jan03.htm

http://www.mindfully.org/Water/2003/Labs-Fake-Tests22jan03.htm

This is a link to an investigative report including field testing that showed deer scenting someone in carbon clothing at numerous distances.

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=1442411&version=2&locale= EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.1.1

This is a picture of how much carbon is in a typical hunting suit......forgetting the fact that physics dictate air follows the path of least resistence and won't be forced through fabric before exiting the open arm, neck, and waist........even pretending for a second that all your air is somehow forced through the garment......there is at best 25-30% of surface area covered by carbon. This means that 70-75% of all the air forced through the jacket will not contact any carbon anyways.




I prefer to examine facts instead of going by anecdotal stories and faith.

aeroslinger

"Anecdotal evidence" and testimonials are pretty good assets to have. If science said something did work and people took it to the field and routinely got busted they would not care what the science said, they would not use it. What you and others fail to recognize is that you are not the only, nor the best, nor the most experienced hunters around. We had also had ample experiences and are able to consider what we have done in the past and present and make a pretty darn good assessment. You also fail to recognize that a great majority understand the clothings limitations. Yes, just about anybody can have a fawn walk up to them, whether they are good at scent control or not. But when you notice more and closer encounters with mature deer, you're going to ponder what you did differently and continue doing those things. Naturally, if the only thing you did differently was add some carbon clothing, you would assume it was working. Carbon clothing reminds me of the Whisker Biscuit. I see people slam it because they say no way can it work because of fletching contact. Both products enjoy enormous success and sales because people use them and get great results. If something doesn't perform or is junk, the buying public will figure it out pretty fast, not 20 years later and still going strong.

atlasman

I prefer facts.


This statement right there demonstrates the major stumbling block in this debate. There are those that know the facts and then there are those that know the facts but don't care about them because of something they "saw" or "heard", or perceived anecdotally in the woods. There is no way to argue with that twisted logic........it's like trying to tell someone that they didn't kill a huge buck because of the rabbit's foot in their pocket or the "lucky" shirt they were wearing..........if they believe it helped them then no amount of factual logic will change their mind. What boggles my mind is why anyone would need to "see for themselves" when you already know the answer.........that is equivalent to leaping form your treestand to "see for yourself" that science was right about gravity.


I don't think anyone has ever made that assertion.


If you TRUELY understood the clothings limitations I doubt you wouldn't own it or use it. Just to be fair though I would LOVE to hear your explanation of how the suit eliminates your scent at a significant level (forget the regeneration stuff for this discussion) considering the photo that I showed you with no more then 30% of the surface area of the fabric containing carbon particles..........also considering that physics dictates that airflow (and other forms of matter) will ALWAYS follow the path of least resistance which in any non air tight garment would be the neck, arm, waist, and leg openings. Even assuming ALL the air from inside the suit got somehow forced through the garment (which everyone knows doesn't happen) 70% of it will never even touch the carbon. If you can explain to me and everyone else how this eliminates your scent effectively I will be very impressed.


This is always where it gets silly...........and frankly, stuff like that is insulting to the intelligence of all hunters. It's the kind of crap they put on labels (of every product) to sell to gullable, desperate people looking for magic in a bottle. It's just stupid to pin success or lack of it on a product. Your success depends on so many different factors that statements like these are laughable. Check out Buckeye's thread........it is FULL of guys saying they either don't wear it and do just fine or HAVE work it and noticed no difference.........couple that with the fact that mature deer fall by the boat load year after year to guys who use every product and guys who use no products alike.......and they have for hundreds of years. That is why anecdotal stories are useless........for every one you hear there is another one to contradict it.


That's not true in this case because there is no way to know if the product is working or not........other then faith.......and the fact that it is camo will keep people wearing it no matter what just so they don't feel like they wasted their money. If a rest doesn't work you can't shoot.......if a pair of boots doesn't work you freeze.........if a rangefinder doesn't work you have to guess.......if a treestand doesn't work you get hurt or killed.........if a broadhead doesn't work you lose a deer........if carbon doesn't work you just sit there thinking (and hoping) it does.


I know you are a firm believer in having to own a carbon suit to have a valid opinion on them..........how do you respond to all the people in Buckeye's thread that have said they owned the suits and they did nothing for them.