blacktail slayer

annika3,

Scent Lok will not work at all after 45 days max. A $5 camo tshirt will work just as good as any scent lok clothing after 45 days max and maybe even less. So scent lok does not help even in the slightest after this short amount of time. Even brand new on day 1 your scent lok will not help control your scent by 10%. I don't know if you were just throwing out that number. I suggest you read the website I posted for the facts. I wonder if the scent lok fans will still believe in their clothing after scent lok may lose in court and confirm their product does not work. You did read who they are going to court right? I guess when people spend that kind of money they don't want to believe in the facts and that they wasted the money on something that does not really work. Scent Lok clothing is really nice, but the scent control does not work as they claim.

annika3

Yes, 10% was a number that I through out there but my question is..........

DOES IT HURT YOU?

It has nothing to do with trying to justify spending the money.

I understand scent control goes beyond just scent lok clothing. I shower before EVERY hunt. All my clothes are washed and stored in scent free bags stored in a shed with only my hunting clothes and supplies. I don't put on my hunting clothes until I get to my hunting location. I wear the lightest amount of clothes I need to get to my stand and then put on my outer layers. I spray everything once I get into my stand. IALWAYS wear head gear to cover sent along with mouth guard.

One of the biggest things I've noticed are my boots and the smell in them so I spray (soak) them down with scent killer spray and scent elimanating powder after every 2 hunts andput them on my boot drier. If you don't think it killsscent, smell the inside of your rubber boots after a couple long walks sweating in them and then do the protocol above and the stink is gone.

If you don't think it works, fine, but I have plenty of big bucks on the wall that tell me different. And I don't like to take any chances, if I can control those chances, and put the odds in my favor.

LouisianaTomkat

Scent Lok, Scent Blocker, Scent Killer, Cover Scent, whatever you want to use, it's out there. I will keep my clothes clean and myself and gear clean. Beyond that, I think you are pissing your money away. If a bloodhound can find you after taking every scent control precaution to the max, do you really think you are fooling a whitetail's nose?

LT

blacktail slayer

annika3,

I would say that Scent Lok hurts a hunters wallet. I hear people spending $500 on just one suit. I have plenty of big bucks and bulls on the wall also without using any of these products. I prefer to use the old camo style military clothing that is UV free. Scent Lok clothing is very good quality, but I think they raise their prices way to much for a product that does not work. I am just trying to save hunters money to be spent on other hunting products. I think the sprays and anit-bacterial products would work pretty good. Hair, feet, and breath are the main things to watch out for. We have millions if not billions of deed skin cells flaking off that lands on the ground or could be blown by the wind. There is no 100% guaruntee a person can be scent free. Scent Lok is at the bottom of the list for me with products that work. I would spend my money on other scent control products if it were me. I choose baking soda, scent free and UV free soap, and air dry. How can people claim that they would not got their deer without scent lok if it does not past 45 days? It can not be reactivated in a dryer. I get close enough to deer and elk to touch them with my hand or bow downwind of me. I don't wear scent lok. I think guess if people need that mental expensive edge to help them hunt. It just is not really working like the company says it does. Good luck in 09 and wack another monster buck.

blacktail slayer

ttt for the member that just started a new Scent Lok thread.

gregrn43

Nice bucks

Huntinlady

You guys are so right! I bought a couple of suites when they first came out. I had spent a few years using this stuff and tried to see if it works or not and you can NOT hunt 360!! I even bought the very first stuff that came out with a some kind of scent lock in it, it was some stuff from the army, it worked just as well. I have used this stuff and it does not work!!! I hunt with the wind and it works!!!

readytohunt

I get a kick out of these people who throw on a scent-lok jacket before a hunt, get busted, and then tell everyone that it doesn't work. You need to cover yourself from head to toe in scent-lok AND hunt the wind. Even then, you won't be 100% scent-free, but the key is to minimize your scent as low as possible. Good hunting!

high tide

It looks like Scent Blocker (robinson) is different and the courts ruled it works


9. The parties stipulate that carbon can adsorb human odor. The parties
stipulate that the amount of carbon in the product and the process used to embed the
carbon to the product impacts the carbon’s effectiveness. The parties further stipulate
that Robinson’s carbon-embedded clothing contains substantially more carbon and uses a
different application process than other carbon-embedded hunting clothing products
currently on the market. Robinson has produced evidence of expert testing that
establishes that its garments containing activated carbon are effective at blocking the
transmission of odor through the garments and the amount of carbon used and the process by which the carbon is embedded in the liner of the hunting clothing makes the odor-
blocking ability of the Robinson products more effective at reducing human odor than
other hunting garments containing carbon as well as non-carbon hunting garments.

10. Robinson has provided evidence of expert testing that establishes that,
after washing and drying, its carbon fabrics continue to be effective at reducing odor
permeation.
4

11. Robinson has provided expert testing that shows that after washing and
drying its carbon fabrics are “reactivated” and such clothing is restored to some extent for continued beneficial use.


full federal court ruling below:

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA


In re:

Activated Carbon-Based Hunting
Clothing Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation



THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:


Multidistrict Litigation
No. 09-md-2059 (RHK/JJK)






STIPULATED ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT

Plaintiffs commenced this action on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated
persons against Robinson Outdoors, Inc. and Robinson Outdoor Products, LLC
(“Robinson”) for alleged damages suffered from the marketing of carbon-lined hunting
clothing. Plaintiffs sought permanent injunctive relief, damages and attorneys’ fees for
alleged violations of various state consumer protection statutes and other laws. The
Plaintiffs for themselves and the Defendants for themselves hereby stipulate to this Final
Order for Settlement.
The findings stipulated herein are for settlement purposes only. They are not
admissible for purposes of determining the liability of other Defendants.
2

FINDINGS

1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and has
jurisdiction over relief against Robinson. Venue in this district is proper.
2. Plaintiffs and Robinson stipulate and agree to this Order to settle and
resolve all matters in dispute arising from the Complaint to the date of entry of the Order.
Robinson does not admit any of the allegations of the Complaint, other than the
jurisdictional facts. Plaintiffs and Robinson stipulate and agree that this Order constitutes
a settlement pursuant to Rule 408.
3. Robinson waives all rights to seek judicial review or otherwise challenge
or contest the validity of this Order.
4. Robinson has used the phrase “odor elimination” in connection with
hunting clothing apparel and other products.
5. Robinson maintains and the parties stipulate that none of Robinson’s
advertising of its “odor eliminating technology” products for at least the past three years
has used the term “100%,” “all,” “completely” or “totally” in referring to efficacy.
6. Robinson also maintains and the parties stipulate that its advertising of its
“odor eliminating technology” products for at least the past three years has used words
that further qualify this language indicating that carbon-embedded clothing cannot totally
eliminate odor. Robinson maintains and the parties stipulate that Robinson’s advertising
in the past three years, taken in context, implies only odor reduction.
7. Robinson maintains and the parties stipulate that Robinson’s advertising
over the last three years advocated a multiple phase process using all Robinson’s
3

products in combination so that the hunter has the best possible opportunity to eliminate
odor.
8. Robinson’s current advertising graphics depict how its “odor eliminating
technology” products work (i.e., that odor goes into the carbon), and Robinson maintains
and the parties stipulate that the graphic is not a depiction of the specific percentage of
odor adsorption.
9. The parties stipulate that carbon can adsorb human odor. The parties
stipulate that the amount of carbon in the product and the process used to embed the
carbon to the product impacts the carbon’s effectiveness. The parties further stipulate
that Robinson’s carbon-embedded clothing contains substantially more carbon and uses a
different application process than other carbon-embedded hunting clothing products
currently on the market. Robinson has produced evidence of expert testing that
establishes that its garments containing activated carbon are effective at blocking the
transmission of odor through the garments and the amount of carbon used and the process
by which the carbon is embedded in the liner of the hunting clothing makes the odor-
blocking ability of the Robinson products more effective at reducing human odor than
other hunting garments containing carbon as well as non-carbon hunting garments.
10. Robinson has provided evidence of expert testing that establishes that,
after washing and drying, its carbon fabrics continue to be effective at reducing odor
permeation.
4

11. Robinson has provided expert testing that shows that after washing and
drying its carbon fabrics are “reactivated” and such clothing is restored to some extent for
continued beneficial use.
12. Robinson denies all the allegations and claims made by the Plaintiffs in
this and the related actions.
13. The parties have agreed to settle all claims that have been brought or
could have been brought against the other parties and forever release and discharge each
other from all possible claims except for performance of the settlement obligations.
14. The Court adopts these facts for purposes of this Order.
ORDER

ADVERTISING AND MARKETING RELIEF

II. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED

Robinson is hereby permitted to continue to use its phrase “odor eliminating
technology” but only in conjunction with other words or phrases that expressly make
clear that the clothing in question can only reduce the release of human odor. Robinson
may not use the phrases “elimination” or “odor eliminating” or “scent eliminating” alone
or in conjunction with words or graphics that say or depict “scent-free,” “odor free,”
“100%,” “all” or “every trace” or “every bit” of odor as removed by the clothing.
Robinson is hereby permitted to continue to use the word “regenerate” or
“reactivate” as a description of the process of removal of some trapped odor from the
clothing, as long as they do not include additional words or graphics that say or depict
5

regeneration or reactivation as a process that will restore the clothing to pristine or like
new condition.
RELEASE

III. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED

Any and all claims (except for performance of the settlement obligations) that the
Plaintiffs have against the Defendants and any of their officers, directors, shareholders,
members, employees, agents, affiliates and attorneys, of whatever nature, whether known
or unknown, from the beginning of time, are hereby dismissed, discharged and satisfied
in full.
RETENTION OF JURISDICTION

III. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that this Court shall retain jurisdiction over this
matter for purposes of construction, modification and enforcement.

ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT

IV. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that pursuant to Federal Rule 54(b), that there is no
just reason for delay and the Clerk of Court shall immediately enter this Order as a final
judgment as to relief against Robinson.

blacktail slayer

I would agree that the scent blocker works right after it is made. I would assume they used new clothing in the court case. Now after the clothing is full of odor; how much can the clothing hold then? Is it only 5% of what it could hold after the first wash and then only 1% after the second wash? That is a question I would like to know the answer to.

Quote:

"What is this "huge" difference? No carbon filter can be regenerated or reactivated in a household dryer, period. Since you say it is "fact" I would love to see the published data that proves Scentblocker's carbon can be regenerated or reactivated at temps anywhere near the low temps dryers are able to reach.

I can very easily provide the facts and references for the use of activated carbon as a VOC filter and trust me...those will not back up the use of carbon as a filter in clothing once the carbon is spent.

Like I said..show me the data, not a statement. By data...I mean real life, unbiased scientific data. If Scentblocker really had a way to reactivate carbon at low temperatures they would forget the hunting market and be a giant in the environmental field. This would mean that they have figured out what all other engineers and scientists around the world have not been able to figure out and utilize in the real life use of activated carbon as VOC filters.

If I had a real dog in the fight it would be very easy to set up a controlled experiment to show just how quickly any of the carbon clothing manufacturer's clothing is rendered useless for filtering out VOCs...and how a dryer does nothing to change that...but I don't care that much about it. A swatch of fabric, a VOC medium in a glass container, and a PID with timed detections of VOCs passing thru the fabric...pretty easy experiement. Wash and dry according to directions and repeat. Hmmm...

I said in this thread early on that no matter what the reality of activated carbon reactivation and regeneration is...there are plenty of convinced hunters that will continue to purchase because they just believe that somehow their clothes defy what is known about carbon filters.

I have also said many times, and still say that I believe if the carbon clothing companies can continue to make money, more power to them."
Robin@AimLow