Proper care for activated carbon suits

[CB on the run]

I was just helping a co-worker diagnose a evap problem with her truck.  As it turns out there is a CARBON filled canister by your gas tank to absorb excess gas vapors.  According to the mechanic, this canister is regularily 'cleansed' by the system allowing fresh air in.  Maybe there is something to this carbon deal.
 
Charlie Belle

[Woods Walker]

ORIGINAL: JPH

ORIGINAL: CB on the run

I read an article within the past several years about a man the hunts slightly differently than most of us.  He covers his body(exposed skin) with ash and charcoal from a prior fire then stalks deer.  His sucess is whether or not he can touch a deer.  According to the article he is often sucessfull so apparently the charcoal ash does reduce air borne human odor molecules.  Obviously he is using 'new' charcoal each time.

Charlie Belle

I might actually try that! Not the touching part, but the ash.

I was going to make a comment here about "touching ash"....but I will refrain.....[;)]

[DeanoZ]

Honestly Woodsie I did not post the article to start another thread on the legitimacy of carbon suits...there have been several such threads thus far and in each of them you've gone on record questioning their legitimacy..thats your right and duely noted.  However since you did open it up for discussion again I'd like to clarify a couple things, especially since I did speak to Mr. Eberhart extensively on the topic....
 

A representative of a scent-loc company made a statement about how his product works

 
He is not a representative of scent-lok nor does he receive any renumeration from the scent-lok company, he simply believes in the product and uses it extensively on his hunts..furthermore he attributes much of his sucess in the latter years of his hunting career to the use of scent-lok clothing..the man holds almost two dozen record book deer kills in one of the most highly hunted and pressured states in North America.
 

So my question is just WHAT percentage is it? Even if it's 95%, that means after 20 reactivations that the suit no longer can absorb anything.

 
Your math and logic are no more sound or flawed than what you are accusing the Scent-lok folks of.  If your going to present an argument I think its only fair you base it on fact (as you have asked them to do) and not on speculation (which you freely admit was) which you accuse them of as well.
 

There were some guys that hunted one of the farms my friend owns and they were staying in the old farmhouse with us that serves as our "camp". We have a washer/dryer in there, and these guys were SOOO scent-anal, that they washed and dried their scent-loc TWICE A DAY! After the morning hunt, and then again in the evening. Yet they STILL complained about being "busted" on almost every hunt they did.

 
You can be as scent anal as you want, but if you don't follow some of the basics as outlined in the original post its all for not.  I hear stories all the time of folks going to a hunting camp, wearing their scent protective clothing in their camps, smelling of bacon and the morning hunts breakfast, then getting in their cars with it on, and spraying down with some sort of cover-up scent.  Well guess what..the carbon is on the INSIDE...not the outside!!!  So without the proper care and precatuions you may still get busted.
 

Now an industry representative states that there's a "CERTAIN PERCENTAGE" that in fact DOESN'T reactivate, but he doesn't say how much. What's he hiding? If they are truely the real McCoy, then state your numbers, and shut guys like me up!

 
I can assure you John is as straight and honest as the day is long.  I've been on this earth long enough to know a chocoloate covered turd when I see one..and he is not..he is the real deal and took a few hours out of his day to speak to me..."Joey Wannabagabigone" your average Joe hunter and a neophyte in the sport to boot.  He did not have to do that and he imparted some great knowledge in the process..the least of which was the use of scentlok technology...it was the very last thing we spoke of.  So if he has an agenda, I'd be hard pressed to find one in him..and I suspect if you spoke to him you would be too.  The truth is he does not care one bit whether you or anyone else believe in it or not, he uses it and knows it works...he's got the trophy bucks to prove it. [;)]
 
As always WW, I enjoy the spirited discussion and respect both your views and extensive knowledge in deer hunting, I guess we agree to disagree on this subject...and thats okay...its what our constitution was founded on and what makes this such a great country!

[Woods Walker]

No, I think you are missing something. We only need to reactivate the carbon that his bound to odor molecules. So if a hunter is careful about his scent control regimen (and follows the above guidelines) he/she may several good years with piece of clothing.

 
What am I missing? The scent-loc rep himself states that,
 
"[font="times new roman"]All Scent Lok branded garments use carbon derived from charred coconut shells. Coconut carbon has smaller pores than most other carbons making it the best available carbon for adsorbing small molecules associated with human odors.[/font] "
 
The molecules he's refering to are the scent molecules that are absorbed by the carbon. Then he states that,
 
"[font="times new roman"]To reactivate carbon garments, put them in a household or commercial dryer for 30 to 40 minutes on a high heat setting. The heat creates what is scientifically known as "Brownian molecular motion". This motion breaks a percentage of the molecules free from the carbon (carbon is not affected by the heat) and allows them to escape out the dryer vent.[/font]
[font="times new roman"][/font] 
As I understand this, he's refering to a percentage of the aforementioned molecules that have been absorbed by the carbon. So therefore, THERE HAS TO BE A REMAINDER OF MOLECULES THAT AREN'T BROKEN FREE FROM THE CARBON.
 
Just WHAT this percentage is, is the unknown factor.
 
IMO, this is analogous to a sponge, that get's 100% full of water. You squeeze it out, but 5% remains in the sponge. Next time you have to use the sponge, you now have 95% of the capacity that you had when you first used it. Eventually (and in this case, it'd be twenty times) the sponge will no longer absorb anymore water.
 
So what am I missing?
 
 
 
 

[Woods Walker]

Deano: So this fellow is no authority on the topic, and you just posted this because it's sounds good?  I don't doubt this fellow's sincerity and I have no reason to as I don't know him form Adam.
 
But if you do in fact trust what he has to say, then you are supporting my argument (based on carbon industry studies)which I've had all along, that the household dryer is NOT capable of reactivating the carbon. The only question is by what amount it doesn't.
 
I do believe that the scent-loc folks say that ALL the carbon can be reactivated, which your friend obviously does not buy into either.
 
And just for the record, it was you (or your friend, specifically) who brought up "percentages" into the equation. He brought it up, but then didn't quantify it, so my response is simply a QUESTION about what he is speculating on....
 
"Your math and logic are no more sound or flawed than what you are accusing the Scent-lok folks of.  If your going to present an argument I think its only fair you base it on fact (as you have asked them to do) and not on speculation (which you freely admit was) which you accuse them of as well."
 
My own opinion, which is based on carbon industry studies, is that the percentage of reactivation that a household dryer can achieve is ZERO. So there's the fact. If you friend is going to present a quantifiable concept (the elusive "percentage"), then why not ask HIM for facts too?
 
In all seriousness, I'd like to know what he does think the number is, or even a best guess.

[DeanoZ]

Deano: So this fellow is no authority on the topic, and you just posted this because it's sounds good? I don't doubt this fellow's sincerity and I have no reason to as I don't know him form Adam.

[quote]ORIGINAL: Woods Walker

Uhhh...no, your twisting words my friend.  I believe him to be somone who has great success with it and took the time to share what he's learned about it and what works for him with us.  Those are HIS tips based on HIS own personal experience and his success in my mind makes him an authority on Deer Hunting..not scent-lok technology.  You won't find that list on Scent-Loks site or any others.  As for my desire to post it, simply a matter of passing on what I felt was some good information and sharing it with my fellow hunters here on D&DH.
 
Woodsie I'm not interested in debating the merits of scent-lok technology or percentages.  I've done enough of my own research to draw my own conclusions..and for the record I support that the technology does work and what John Eberhart has shared with us.
 
I can tell you his intent was not to make a believer out of you or I...he already believes it works, as do I and thats what matters to me.  His intent was to pass on what works for him.  Use it or discard it...but like I said I did my research and will have a clear conscience when I plop down my $$$ for scent lok clothing
 
Its all good my brother

[Woods Walker]

Deano: At this point I'm NOT debating whether your friend thinks it works or not. I know he does. I only what to know what percentage of non-reactivation he thinks doesn't occur. No debate. I promise you I won't argue what he thinks that is. He obviously has an opinion, or he wouldn't have mentioned it. Promise! [:)]

[MDV WI hunter]

I see one fatal error in the logic presented, BROWNIAN MOTION.  As defined as the random motion at the molecular level in which the human scent molecules will detach themselves from the carbon molecules due to heat agitation.   That's a load of crap, I've also seen someone say this is why bridges and roads have expansion joints????  Misdirection at it's finest.  Anything concrete has joints for two reasons, subsoil expansion and contraction and moisture content that expands and contracts - all of which is replicated in laboratories which is why all contrete when used in public settings is tested for moisture content and aggregate content.  Same people will tell you you can predict the stock market!!  (That's a contradiction as the mathmeticians that outlined Brownian Motion also related it to "A Random Walk" regarding stock picking)  Please keep in mind that all aforementioned are theories and nothing more.  Mathematical representations of what we think happens.
 
Guys, I'm an engineer, I've studied thermodynamics, heat transfer, kinematics and the list goes on.  Yes, the suit will work like your furnace filter will work.  The only problem is that it will be saturated within minutes and will NOT be usuable after that.  Also, if it picks up human scent will it pick up scent from trees, bushes, plants, and anything outside.  YES.  The military used them as disposable items to be used once and tossed to combat chemical warfare.  It's not stated anywhere if they actually work.  It's a classic marketing ploy to engage the sympathies of the general public. 
 
I side with WW on this topic and I also appologize and this thread has really taken a turn.